D&D 5E Low Level Wizards Really Do Suck in 5E

[the Jester]

I haven't read the thread past the first page, but I will just say that the wizard in my 5e game is almost 4th level and he's been one of the toughest members of the party, by virtue of that dwarven armor proficiency and a high Con score. He just prevented an almost certain TPK (which still killed two pcs) when the group fell into a trap and found themselves facing three gricks. He's usually able to deal out lowish damage every round and encounter-changing damage when he wants to spend slots, but he rarely has more than one round go by without him damaging something. I guess it just depends on the group and the game.

 

[Zaran]

I haven't read the thread past the first page, but I will just say that the wizard in my 5e game is almost 4th level and he's been one of the toughest members of the party, by virtue of that dwarven armor proficiency and a high Con score. He just prevented an almost certain TPK (which still killed two pcs) when the group fell into a trap and found themselves facing three gricks. He's usually able to deal out lowish damage every round and encounter-changing damage when he wants to spend slots, but he rarely has more than one round go by without him damaging something. I guess it just depends on the group and the game.

Just because you can make a heavy armor wizard dwarf doesn't mean it makes sense. And just because he is really tough doesn't make him an effective member of the party.

 

[KarinsDad]

Also, wizards try to hoard their spells too much. "The need really has to be there" = "It gets the job done and saves greater than or equal to 1 cure light wound's worth of attacks against us". Your "big day" was 21 damage, when you could do 70 damage _every day_ by just casting magic missiles at 3rd level. At a certain point, "I have a 60% chance to hit for 5.5 damage" compared to "I have a 100% chance to hit for 10.5 damage" means that magic missile more than triples your effectiveness for a round.

No doubt.

I've also heard the DM say "Yeah, that 15 points of damage was awesome. Too bad he only had 2 hit points remaining."

I also do not know when the day is over. My wizard is not clairvoyant. We had 4 encounters the last adventuring day (level 4) and had a ton of resources remaining.

The adventuring day before that (level 3), we had a) party split up, 2 PCs vs. 3, 2 PCs vs. 2, 2 PCs vs. 2, b) 4 PCs vs. 5, c) 4 PCs vs. 5, d) 4 PCs vs. 7, e) 6 PCs vs. 7, f) 6 PCs. vs 12, g) 6 PCs vs. 8; or 7 fights for my PC and 3 other PCs, 4 fights for 2 of the PCs with very few resources remaining (I had one spell left over out of 7, because the Bard cast all of her spells in the first fight which was super tough for her, she was out of spells all day long).

So I am at the point now where I typically cast a minimum of one spell per encounter if it does not appear to be an easy encounter. In about 2 more levels, that average will probably up to about 1.5 spells per encounter, etc. I'm not too concerned as to whether it is my resources being used or other PC resources being used. My idea is that all of the PCs should use some of their resources and husband some of their resources throughout the day.

 

[Skyscraper]

Question: how does the wizard fare at mid/high level?

I'm curious, because I recall in 1E, the wizard was a really (I mean, really) lousy party member at very low level. You had no spell bonuses for wizards back then, so you had a 1-daily spell wizard at level 1. Assuming you had your magic missile, the wizard was able to dish out a measly 1d4 points of damage. Then, he had to rely on his trusted dagger or staff, because 1E wizards did not have proficiency in crossbows (as far as I remember anyway). And a 1E wizard with no armor and a lousy to hit bonus, was not a very good melee fighter...

By the time they got to level 5, they became effective and had some interesting options. The 5d6 fireball or lightning bolt was of course a classic, but other good choices appeared also, including the useful dispel magic; and some second level spells were also pretty good.

The wizard of course had some meaningful 1st level spell, such as Sleep, that was made immortal by its use by Raistlin in the Dragonlance novels.

However, they wizards had 1d4 hit points per level. To say they were weak is an understatement.

Still... Weren't they fun to play?

Anyway, the point is: I actually like what I'm reading here, that low-level wizards aren't very reliable damage-dealers or very strong party members. Perhaps this means that they return to their former glory of being great at higher level. I would be very happy that this be the case: is it?

 

[seebs]

Yes, I should have said average damage on a successful hit. Damage in the game is not DPR. It's damage.

On the same round that the Wizard does Magic Missile, the two weapon fighting Rogue is going to typically do:

a) 1d4+2D6+5 (+1 magic dagger) plus D6 = 18 or
b) 1d4+2D6+5 = 14.5 or
c) 3D6 = 10.5 or
d) 0

Only d averages less damage and d is rare. Magic Missile is a weak version of the Rogue the vast majority of the time.

I'm maybe missing a thing. As a first level spell, magic missile is 3 force darts. Force is almost never resisted, and it can't miss, and it has a range of 120'. Average damage is 10.5. And you absolutely can't ignore the "on a successful hit" qualifier, because the rogue can indeed miss sometimes. Furthermore, the rogue can do those larger damage numbers to exactly one target. If you have multiple targets with low hit points, magic missile can take three of them down.

But perhaps more importantly, I don't think wizards "suck" from having low damage output. I've never played wizards because I wanted damage numbers. I've played wizards because I wanted to radically reshape the combat. Illusions, charms, buffs and debuffs. Heck, I don't even usually use sleep. I'm not sure my PF wizard ever prepped it in a campaign that went from 8th to 24th level... But silent image? Unseen servant? Heck yeah.

 

[KarinsDad]

I'm maybe missing a thing. As a first level spell, magic missile is 3 force darts. Force is almost never resisted, and it can't miss, and it has a range of 120'. Average damage is 10.5. And you absolutely can't ignore the "on a successful hit" qualifier, because the rogue can indeed miss sometimes. Furthermore, the rogue can do those larger damage numbers to exactly one target. If you have multiple targets with low hit points, magic missile can take three of them down.

While what you say is technically correct, the DPR POV is somewhat flawed. The wizard is doing this a couple of times a day. The Rogue is doing it encounter in and encounter out. This means that the wizard player has to proactively choose when to cast and when not to cast. As a typical rule, he should be using Magic Missile when the foe has an AC of 18, not when the foe has an AC of 12. He should typically use Magic Missile on a single foe when the foe has a lot of hit points, not when the foe has 5 or 7 hit points.

The Rogue player does not really have these concerns too much. He tends to kill one foe, then he tends to move on to the next one. Sure, he might use his off hand weapon once in a blue moon first if he thinks that his current foe is down to low single digit hit points, but for the most part, he just does damage nearly every single round. With a 60% hit chance (a fairly typical chance), his chance of doing d above is 16% or one round in six. At 70%, that drops to 9% or one round in eleven. That's once per every three encounters. White noise.

 

[keterys]

Yes, I should have said average damage on a successful hit. Damage in the game is not DPR. It's damage.

At a certain point, you have to factor it in. You've noted caring about enemies failing saves, so you should conversely care about people missing. Especially when discussing something whose only saving grace is that it doesn't miss.

But, I agree that the rogue is a better combatant than the wizard at low level. Fighter is too. And the cleric. Bard probably too. And, well, _everyone_.

 

[keterys]

The Rogue is doing it encounter in and encounter out.

Out of curiosity, do you guys allow delaying?

A dual wielding rogue should often miss out on sneak attack without the ability to delay, though your larger party size than I'm used to likely helps out. I play a rogue and ability to sneak attack is actually a real restriction without certain setups (ex: stealth, higher level arcane trickster).

 

[fuindordm]

No doubt. I just feel that the wizard's effectiveness in the game should be measured by whether he takes one specific spell or not. There should be a lot of good options, not just one.

Have you considered inventing your own spell? I know the DMG isn't out, but that's another reasonable request for your DM I think.

What would an abjuration spell look like that was similarly effective to sleep and color spray? Maybe something like a damage ward that gives 1d4+Int bonus temp HP to all allies within 10'?

 

[KarinsDad]

Out of curiosity, do you guys allow delaying?

A dual wielding rogue should often miss out on sneak attack without the ability to delay, though your larger party size than I'm used to likely helps out. I play a rogue and ability to sneak attack is actually a real restriction without certain setups (ex: stealth, higher level arcane trickster).

Actually, I don't recall it coming up. Or if it has, it came up as "Can we Delay?", "No, you can Ready in 5e.", end of conversation. The players are pretty laid back and wouldn't bat an eye if an old rule no longer existed. They don't get wrapped around the axle on rules. The Rogue would pull out his bow and ready a shot with sneak attack damage.


Everyone in the party has a Dex of 14 or better except the Fighter, and the Cleric now has the Alert feat, so the Rogue doesn't go first too often. At levels 1 to 3, the Rogue and the Bard had the best init at +3 (followed by +2, +2, +2, +1), but now it's Cleric first at +7, then Rogue at +4, then +3, +2, +2, +1. At AC 20, 20, 19, the Cleric, Fighter, and Ranger/Wizard have no problem jumping into melee either. And even the Bard jumps into melee if it is just a single foe (although she has learned her lesson to not do it if she is going to be swarmed).

The small difference in init numbers meant that the Rogue probably went first at best 1 encounter in 5. And at least a third of our fights have been with surprise (most of those in Greenest, but a few out in the wilderness at night and in the most recent dungeon), so that helped the Rogue as well. The Rogue also has other options than sneak attack damage if he gets the first init (the magic dagger has a limited offensive spell, and his Color Spray spell).


But there is another reason it has never come up. The DM and myself are heavily into gaming and know the rules fairly well, but my wife has been playing since 3E and she plays to socialize. She doesn't care about rules. The other 3 players never played 3E and only played 4E for 5 or 6 months (they played Rolemaster for decades, I think there is a Delay action in Rolemaster, but it works differently IIRC), so Delay isn't something really on their radar either. The Ready action is sufficient and they are not predisposed to think about Delaying like someone who played 3E and 4E for a long time.