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

[sunshadow21]

That's a ringing condemnation, considering how bad the poor rogue had it with SA - whole, stereotypically quite common, types of monsters flatly immune to start.

In the amount of party and DM cooperation it apparently takes to get some of the spells in 5E to work properly, the comparison is apt. Requiring a party member to be able to grapple an enemy caster for silence to work is just as bad as requiring the fighter to get into just the right position for the rogue to be able to use sneak attack. Just like sneak attack, the problem isn't just the spells, it's getting into a position to use the ability without wasting it or dying in the process. It wasn't much fun with the rogue, and I can't imagine it's that much fun for the player playing the wizard either, at least as far as most people are going to be concerned. There's wanting teamwork and there's being just plain absurd, and a lot of the stuff I've seen in this thread goes too far into the absurd territory for me to be all that interested in even attempting to deal with it.
-------
As for the spell list, I'm seeing the same basic complaints with 5E spells in general that I did with the 3rd edition cleric list at low levels. It's not a lack of power, it's a lack of usefulness. They are so focused on power of the overall spell list that most of the individual spells are made so specific so as to be rendered mostly a waste of time if the DM chooses to be hyper finicky on exactly what the different spells can do. The length of the list is actually a large part of the problem, because the devs are either forced to water down all of the spells on the list to keep the overall power of the list manageable, or have the issues that came up in 3rd edition.

I'm actually reaching a point with both PF and D&D in general where the straight wizard or even cleric usually isn't worth it because of this. I'm definitely starting to prefer classes that don't rely almost entirely on their spell list because they tend to be a lot more fun at the table for everyone and a lot less headache at the same time. Partial casters or even full casters that don't rely just on their spell list (like the witch from PF) are a lot more fun, flavorful, and easier to both play and, if needed, fix without having to completely rewrite their entire spell list.

 

[Tony Vargas]

In the amount of party and DM cooperation it apparently takes to get some of the spells in 5E to work properly, the comparison is apt.

Getting an Improved Invisibility or having an ally to flank was all a 3e rogue needed from the rest of the party. That's not so bad. Where the 3.5 rogue had it pretty bad was that almost a third of monster types were just immune to his SA, by default - the 5e wizard has it easy by comparison.

Requiring a party member to be able to grapple an enemy caster for silence to work is just as bad as requiring the fighter to get into just the right position for the rogue to be able to use sneak attack.

Again, 1 spell of many vs only way for the Rogue to do decent damage.

 

[sunshadow21]

Again, 1 spell of many vs only way for the Rogue to do decent damage.

One spell that was a lot better throughout all of the previous editions that had it, and a spell that a lot of people really liked. And it's not the only one in that boat or even the only one mentioned in this thread. Charm Person was never the easiest of spells to use in earlier editions, and now seems largely useless on top of the challenge of being intended for use in scenarios where open spell casting is frowned upon. The fact that it takes so much more effort to make many of these spells now work even half as well as they used to is a bit silly to me. And the stuff they did on the positive side just don't really excite me, even if they are nice and do their intended jobs well enough. Cantrips are nice, but they're no substitute for more spell slots to cast more actual spells. The loosening up of the rules for prepared spells is something that I've seen as more or less normal in most of the 3rd edition or PF games I've ever played in, so aside from seeing the recognition of it in the formal rules, it really doesn't mean much. The ritual spells are nice, but they don't really make up for the overusage of the concentration mechanic or the limited spell slots; from what I've seen, the ritual spell tag sees less and less use as levels progress whereas the concentration tag does not. In the end, the positive changes they made to casting simply aren't enough to balance out by the cuts and limitations added, at least for me.

I get that the wizard is still perfectly effective with the right spells and tactics, but it is not anywhere near where it used to be in terms of either versatility or fun for a lot of people, as this thread shows, even with all the positive changes they made in 5E. Some people will be perfectly happy with the trade offs made, especially on the improvements made to the martial classes, but to many of those that actually liked the casting classes before, the sum of all the changes is not a positive one; the cuts simply go too deep for no real good reason, creating problems of their own in the process of trying to avoid even a hint of the power that 3rd edition casters had. I don't have a problem with what they did as much as how they did it and how much they did. Heavy usage of the concentration mechanic, cutting spell slots, and nerfing a lot of the spells would have been fine individually and/or in smaller doses of each, but done all together and all very heavily is simply way too much. I could even see some spells requiring party help for maximum results, but not when paired with the high chance of the enemies making their saves already limiting the usefulness of a large number of spells at the same time and all of the other limits put on casting.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I could even see some spells requiring party help for maximum results, but not when paired with the high chance of the enemies making their saves already limiting the usefulness of a large number of spells at the same time and all of the other limits put on casting.

Save chances are not that high, and only proficient saves remotely keep up with rising save DCs. As far as 'limits put on casting,' 5e casters face very few. They don't provoke AoOs, having no risk losing spells when they cast them in melee. Component requirements aren't as stringent as they used to be, especially compared to AD&D. Casters have more spells at 1st level than they did in classic editions, and play speeds through those first few levels rapidly. Wizards prepare spells every day, but cast them spontaneously, combining the tactical flexibility of 3.5 sorcerers with the strategic flexibility they had in 3.5 - 5e prepped casters are the most flexible, least-limited they've ever been. So they have fewer spell slots - how many are likely to be wasted on a spell you didn't need now that they cast them spontaneously? And, rough as concentration may seem on certain spells, it also reduces the impetus to layer buffs on the party, which also reduces the pressure on spell slots.

 

[sunshadow21]

Save chances are not that high, and only proficient saves remotely keep up with rising save DCs. As far as 'limits put on casting,' 5e casters face very few. They don't provoke AoOs, having no risk losing spells when they cast them in melee. Component requirements aren't as stringent as they used to be, especially compared to AD&D. Casters have more spells at 1st level than they did in classic editions, and play speeds through those first few levels rapidly. Wizards prepare spells every day, but cast them spontaneously, combining the tactical flexibility of 3.5 sorcerers with the strategic flexibility they had in 3.5 - 5e prepped casters are the most flexible, least-limited they've ever been. So they have fewer spell slots - how many are likely to be wasted on a spell you didn't need now that they cast them spontaneously? And, rough as concentration may seem on certain spells, it also reduces the impetus to layer buffs on the party, which also reduces the pressure on spell slots.

The save chance issue is debatable as this thread shows. For limits on casting, there may only be limited slots and the concentration mechanic, but their overuse of that one mechanic hurts a lot of the benefits reaped from loosening the other restrictions. Officially, they may be the most flexible ever, but I've seen some variant or other that basically accomplished the prepare spells but cast them spontaneously in just about every home game of 3rd edition and PF I've ever played, so for me, that isn't that much of a gain, but rather a formal acknowledgement that the older official version was usually ignored or modified. Same with component restrictions; most people ignored them, so loosening those rules really has limited impact in actual play compared to earlier systems. And the use of the concentration mechanic doesn't ease pressure on spell slots, it just changes how the pressure is applied, as an example early in the thread of being faced with the decision of which concentration spell to cast shows quite clearly, as does the point that people felt compelled to save their actual slots for truly meaningful moments, often to have them fizzle or fail anyway if they choose the wrong spell or the party is not able to help them get the intended benefit from it. For those who tended to stick closely to the official rules of the earlier editions, it's a major improvement, even with the limited spell slots and the concentration rules, but for the many groups that tended to houserule or ignore the stricter of the official rules in earlier editions, it's not much of a positive change that is accompanied by a lot of negative changes.

Mechanically, wizards are still doing fine overall, and very few people are challenging that, but what really hurt more than anything was the nerfs to the individual spells that did things like force an abjurer to take sleep if they want to be half way functional in combat even if they have absolutely no in game reason to support taking that spell over an abjuration spell. There may still be all of the formal specializations, but most people in this thread openly acknowledge that many of them are subpar, which makes building a character around them very difficult or worse. If I choose to make a conjurer or an evoker or some other kind of specialist, than I want my spells to show that, and this thread shows quite clearly that this is only possible for a few of the specializations. It's the same problem the third edition cleric has; all clerics usually cast the same spells in the same order regardless of the god they worship, their alignment, or any other rp factors because the rest of their spell list, especially at lower levels, actively penalizes any other spell choice due to the ultra specificness of those other spells. It doesn't invalidate the class or the builds that do support rp well, but it does limit the class severely if the DM insists only allowing spells in the book that work exactly as described and nothing else. This makes the enjoyability of the class highly dependent on factors that I as a player have no control over, and that is a concern, especially for those that don't have a single stable group they play with, which I don't. It may not break your personal game, but there are a lot of groups that it will. This system being so DM dependent has a dark side, and that dark side shows up quite clearly in the changes they made to casters, as the competing examples in this thread show.

 

[GameOgre]

Some casters enjoyed playing overpowered class's and find it harder to enjoy their now less overpowered state even though they are still number one.

Got it.

A lot of what they lost should have never been there.


I'm sure that isn't everyone but there does seem to be a lot of now this dc/spell/feature sucks compaired to before, even from people willing to admite that before was not balanced.

 

[Celtavian]

Some casters enjoyed playing overpowered class's and find it harder to enjoy their now less overpowered state even though they are still number one.

Got it.

A lot of what they lost should have never been there.


I'm sure that isn't everyone but there does seem to be a lot of now this dc/spell/feature sucks compaired to before, even from people willing to admite that before was not balanced.

My concerns are variety. If I specialize in something, I want to do it well enough to be useable in combat. If I'm an enchanter, I want to be able to take a mind over in combat. I don't need to do multiple like 3E. I would like to have a very high chance of maintaining a single domination spell. That doesn't appear possible in this edition.

It is that way for a lot of spells. There seems to be only one sure path to useful spells: no save spells attack roll spells or short-duration spells like a round or two for effectiveness or spells that don't easily break from a common event during the course of gameplay. That limits your spell list substantially.

 

[CapnZapp]

Sunshadow: I don't think it's all that bad.

Remember there's a lot of design space for making the wizard's life easier. The DM could go easy on legendary resistance. Wotc could introduce items that loosen the restrictions on Concentration or spell slots.

Compare Rolemaster: there are lots of fantasy rpgs where magic users are practically worthless without magic items such as "power point multipliers".

Doesn't help Celtavians wizard right now, of course.

But there's nothing fundamentally weak about a wizard. Probably better Wotc was overly cautious than if they let the W dominate as in previous editions...

 

[pemerton]

Do you think bards in D&D would become medieval animators, sharing illusory movies to accompany their stories? Everyone seems to focus on the "tricking people" aspect of illusion magic, but the ability to realistically project animated 3D images would probably be a huge business!

In an old Rolemaster game I ran, there were two PCs who could cast illusions. When they were short on cash they would use their spells to enhance their busking and tale-telling.

 

[pemerton]

Compare Rolemaster: there are lots of fantasy rpgs where magic users are practically worthless without magic items such as "power point multipliers".

The PP rules in RMC2, and even moreso those in RMSS, solve the problem, especially for low levels.

And the issue for high level RM is the 5 minute day, not underpowered casters!