D&D 5E Help a WotC newb!

[Minsc]

Hey guys. Last time I played a lot of D&D, it was 2e. TSR, much different rules than today.

I noticed in my game last night that there are really no Magic Users in the party (yes, we called them Magic Users back in the day).

There aren't any Bards, Clerics, Druids, or Sorcerers either. This party does have a Warlock, and that seemed kind of neat.

That being said, I have always been a fan of Fighters. But I thought my Fighter was a bit underpowered compared to the party. That being said, I want to stick with him (at least for now). But, if things change (he dies, or I just get bored and switch characters), can you guys break down these spellcasters for me?

Clerics aren't the almost-Fighters they used to be (and, truth be told, I always liked Fighter/Cleric multiclassed characters in 2e). Druids are still nature-Clerics, with more offensive spells. Bards seem more their own class, and less "Jack of all trades" characters to me. Somebody in the group said Wizards are uber-powerful, but I've always despised the whole spellbook concept. Is a Sorcerer still a slightly weaker Wizard (I have played a little 3e, for a very brief time)? What the heck is a Warlock?

I can read the in game descriptions, but I don't know what it really means. What I'm trying to say is, I don't really understand the 5e rules (yet).

What are these characters' strengths and weaknesses? Who makes the easiest spellcaster?

 

[dd.stevenson]

What are these characters' strengths and weaknesses? Who makes the easiest spellcaster?

What elements of spellcasting do you find difficult? Deciding spells? Tracking spell use? Looking up spells?

Personally, I dig the warlock as far as easy goes; but I haven't seen a lot of the classes in play much yet.

 

[Minsc]

What issues with spellcasting do I find difficult?

Hmmm, I guess it's because it's a whole new world to me. I mean, I just got the PHB less than a week ago. I haven't had time to read the whole thing, so I decided to go with my tried and true favorite (Fighter) because that cuts about half the rules of the book out that I need to learn.

I still don't fully understand how many actions I take in a turn, and what my options are, but I think I'll learn it by next session (there was very little dice rolling in my first session, mostly just RPing).

This being said, I've let my DM know I do not expect any fudged rolls on his part to benefit my character. And if my guy dies, I plan on bringing a spellcaster into the game (two reasons: I like to try new things, and the party doesn't have one).

 

[Fanaelialae]

Hey guys. Last time I played a lot of D&D, it was 2e. TSR, much different rules than today.

I noticed in my game last night that there are really no Magic Users in the party (yes, we called them Magic Users back in the day).

There aren't any Bards, Clerics, Druids, or Sorcerers either. This party does have a Warlock, and that seemed kind of neat.

That being said, I have always been a fan of Fighters. But I thought my Fighter was a bit underpowered compared to the party. That being said, I want to stick with him (at least for now). But, if things change (he dies, or I just get bored and switch characters), can you guys break down these spellcasters for me?

Clerics aren't the almost-Fighters they used to be (and, truth be told, I always liked Fighter/Cleric multiclassed characters in 2e). Druids are still nature-Clerics, with more offensive spells. Bards seem more their own class, and less "Jack of all trades" characters to me. Somebody in the group said Wizards are uber-powerful, but I've always despised the whole spellbook concept. Is a Sorcerer still a slightly weaker Wizard (I have played a little 3e, for a very brief time)? What the heck is a Warlock?

I can read the in game descriptions, but I don't know what it really means. What I'm trying to say is, I don't really understand the 5e rules (yet).

What are these characters' strengths and weaknesses? Who makes the easiest spellcaster?

The bard is still a jack of all trades, he's simply dropped the master of none part. Particularly if you choose College of Valor, you're a reasonably competent front-line combatant. They're also very skilled and a fully competent caster (particularly if you choose College of Lore).

The cleric is largely the same as it's always been, although if you're looking for a more fighter-ish type you'll want Domain of War. The biggest change is that there's no generic cleric, but rather every domain is a different kind of specialty priest.

Druids haven't changed too much, although Moon druids have a greater focus on shape-shifting.

Sorcerers are basically wizards whose magic comes to them innately. Their meta-magic ability allows them to modify their spells on the fly, although they can't change their spell selection the way a wizard can. I'd say they're just as powerful, but have a more tactical versatility (as opposed to the wizard's strategic versatility of being able to prepare the right spell for the right situation).

Warlocks are casters who draw their powers from a pact they've made with a supernatural entity. As opposed to other casters, for whom magic is largely a daily resource, their focus is primarily on at-will, always-on, and encounter-based (recharge on a short rest) magic.

Wizards are basically what you remember, although every wizard is now a specialist. They don't give up schools to do so, but do gain abilities based around their specialty school.

A big difference from 2e is that no one memorizes spells anymore. Either you know spells or you prepare spells. You can expend an appropriate level spell slot to cast any of the spells you know or prepared.

If you know spells, you choose your new spells when you level up rather than each day. At that point you're locked in as to which spells are available to you. Bards, Sorcerers, and Warlocks know spells.

If you prepare spells, you can change which spells you have available to cast each day. Clerics and Druids can choose from their entire list, whereas Wizards are limited by their spellbook.

The easiest caster, in my opinion, is the Warlock. Because they know spells, you only have to worry about choosing spells when you level up. They also have a shorter list of known spells than other classes. Because most of their magic isn't a daily resource, you don't necessarily have to be quite as careful about when you should cast a spell.

 

[Lackhand]

I like 5e Fighters quite a lot. I know what you mean about them being underpowered; I feel like that's common around 'casters; fighters get some nice tricks but they just can't raise the dead.

Spellcaster-wise:
Clerics are the clerics from 3e, toned down a bit. They're "full casters" in that they get 9 levels of spells -- nobody gets just 7 anymore. Some, like those with the domains of War or Storms may feel more fighter-like, while those with the domain of Light or Nature may feel more caster-like. Their spells are still pretty much our old friends -- curing wounds and removing diseases, blessings and auguries, resisting elements and raising the dead. Those domains again will modify their spell list, though, giving them a bit more oomph.
Not really easy unless you really like healing and your party needs a lot of it.

Paladins are "cleric-light" in a sense.
They have far fewer and less potent spells, which makes them easier in a way.
They come in 3 flavors: Oath of Devotion, the paladins you know and are used to; Oath of the Ancients who are sort of fey-knights, championing joy and freedom; Oath of Vengeance, smiters of the wicked with a bit of a Dark Side edge.
They have a few moving parts, but they're not too bad as casters (any of the 3 oaths).

Rangers can have a pet or pick a favored for and there's one in my group and I don't have a lot to say about them.

Druids are a lot like clerics. They have fewer healing effects and blessing effects, and more effects that hinder or damage the foe. They also get shapechanging and can choose whether to focus on shape shifting or casting.
They're a bit complex, and I wouldn't recommend them out of the gate. With that said, they're not that bad, and if they focus on shape shifting the main non-spell trick they have is whether to cast or shift at any given point.

Fighters and Rogues both have a subclass that gets some access to a small number of spells, which might be a good way to dip your toes in. If so, they might be the easiest casters of all.

Wizards. Wizards never change. They use a spellbook. They are the most flexible caster by far, but have relatively few gewgaws to play with that aren't spells, and there's a lot of spells out there.

Every choice from here on out is at least a little simpler: they're "spontaneous casters", those who don't need to prepare spells each day. It makes them much less flexible, but it's a whole host of complexity you don't have to handle.

Bards. These were a partial-caster in previous editions but now gets all 9 levels of spells (and don't require levels of fighter, thief and druid first)! They're Charisma-based and most of their spells show it: buffs, enchantments, illusions, etc. They also have some class features around aiding, though the spells seem more impactful to me. If you're enjoying fighter but want a little more caster, College of Valor Bard might be up your alley!

Sorceror. These are stronger than they were in 3e, and a ton of fun. Fairly simple, possibly the simplest. A really strong choice, though they're not subtle: pretty much all their spells are combat focused and pretty attack-y at that. They're definitely straightforward though!
The story behind them is that they've got a hint of dragon-touched ancestry which they're able to channel into incredibly potent magic. There are also Wild Sorcerors, who are touched by wild magic, to a similar end -- but with unpredictable results.

Warlock: different even than the other spontaneous caster, warlocks are those who have leveraged a bargain with unwholesome powers. Sort of a cleric of an unworshipped being (the choices now are Fiend, Fey or Cthullhoid Old One), their magic is much more limited than any other caster's.
They know a tiny number of spells which can be used once per short rest -- once per hour. They also get a variety of odd powers which don't fit in the spell-system, like constant spiderclimb or darkvision effects.
They're probably the most straightforward spellcaster to play. Overall.

Note that technically there are also a few types of monk which feel a lot like spellcasters you might look at.

Happy gaming!

 

[GameDoc]

I am playing a cleric and my friend is playing a druid. Our group doesn't have any other primary spell-casters and we do fine.

The druid goes into battle alongside the warriors, and typically leads off with the thunderwave spell to soften up the enemies and scatter them, then uses entangle to try and keep them from regrouping, and then shillelagh to start melee attacks to start picking them off alongside the fighters. He'll hand out a healing spell if needed.

The cleric (me) usually hangs back with the archer and uses ranged spells like sacred flame and spiritual weapon. I will move in to melee in later rounds as the others get close to needing healing spells.

Both the fighter and rogue took the arcane casting build for their characters, but they have both just now gotten spells and haven't really used them routinely.

 

[Minsc]

Wow, thanks a lot guys.

I didn't realize two things that really turn me on to spellcasters:

1) Wizards "memorization" has changed. I always hated that.

2) Warlocks get all their spells back after a short rest. Wow.

 

[Fralex]

Somebody in the group said Wizards are uber-powerful, but I've always despised the whole spellbook concept. Is a Sorcerer still a slightly weaker Wizard (I have played a little 3e, for a very brief time)? What the heck is a Warlock?

Well, I don't have all the answers, but I think I can answer these ones. I've been a wizard and a sorcerer, and my brother is a warlock.

How strong are wizards? Well, their biggest strength is the amount of spells they access, even if they can't use them all at the same time. They're also the best at using "ritual spells," which are like normal spells but you can cast them at less of a cost by spending extra time during the casting process. Most classes need to at least prepare the spell to cast it as a ritual, but wizards can do it for any spell in their spellbooks. Wizards typically get weaker toward the end of the day when their spell slots run low, and of course they can't survive in physical combat very long.

Are sorcerers still just wizards with a slightly different way of casting? Not as much anymore. Sorcerers have gradually come into their own in the past two editions, and although most of the spells they can learn are also wizard spells, they have some unique mechanics. They learn less spells, but these spells are always ready to cast. They also get a ton of cantrips at the start, which is nice. They have a special pool of points they can spend to make minor adjustments to their spells on the fly, or squeeze out an extra spell slot in a pinch. They're quite versatile with what they have, but wizards have more options. Like wizards, they get tired out towards the end of the day.

What are warlocks? Weird. But interesting! Compared to sorcerers and wizards, they run out of steam very quickly. They typically can only cast two spells before needing to rest. They make up for this by being able to recharge most of their magic in just 1 hour, as opposed to the other two mages' eight hours. They perform better the more often they can take a break between fights, and unlike sorcerers and wizards they can use simple weapons and armor pretty well as a fallback. They also have eldritch blast, one of the best ranged attacks in the game, and are very customizable. Their Eldritch Invocations are sort of a collection of little feats just for warlocks, as is the Pact Boon. It's all pretty flavorful.

As for which spellcaster is the easiest, that's probably the cleric, in my opinion. Preparing and casting is very straightforward: you learn every spell on the cleric list, plus a few others your specific god grants for free. You spend slots to cast spells, and regain slots with an 8-hour rest. You get this "Channel Divinity" thing you can use once between 1-hour rests, which lets you siphon power off your deity to do something big, like repel the undead or massively boost the accuracy of one attack. Fun stuff.

Druids are a lot like clerics, but they shapeshift instead of Channel Divinity. You can either specialize in shapeshifting or spellcasting when you pick your Druid Circle.

Bards know a few spells from every class's list, plus a few unique ones. They can bestow a single-use "inspiration die" on allies, which they can spend to boost a roll they make later.

(These last few classes I don't have as much experience with)

 

[Fralex]

Argh. I type really slowly. Nobody had answered these questions when I started, sorry!

 

[Lidgar]

Wow, thanks a lot guys.

2) Warlocks get all their spells back after a short rest. Wow.

BUT, they have extremely limited number of spells they can memorize/know.

Wizards are certainly more interesting when compared to past editions in the way spell casting works. While they may have less overall spells at higher levels, they are much more flexible. And the get a few spells back after a short rest to boot.