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

[raleel]

Archer. They're just as competent in ranged combat as any other non-martial, don't need ammo, and have access to potent ranged damage, superior to that of a bowman.

while i might disagree with KarinsDad about a lot of this thread, I don't disagree here. It's not archer, and specifically for the reasons he stated. They get kinda meh damage due to the lack of a stat mod. Not to mention their range is not that good.

I have a 16 dex gnome wizard - his light crossbow is better than his fire bolt until a second die of damage. Range is better too

I also don't disagree that the low level wizard is hard at low levels, and his role is easily overshadowed in certain parties - specifically like the OPs (bard, arcane trickster, ranger, cleric, fighter). If you have a lot of overlap, it is hard for him to shine - particularly if that overlap is with two arcane casters. The wizard does have a few unique spells, but a lot of them are at higher levels. Find familiar, though, is one, and should be used. It's an out-of-action-economy advantage granter, at bare minimum.

I tend to like the wizard in a controller/change the battlefield role. At levels 1-4, this is hard to do. There are few spells, and if you are outside of those spells, it is a painful road. You are slightly tougher than older editions, but with limited resources to work with. You can't put on any easy button with it. It does not help that HotDQ is at its outset not a great fit for wizards who are not very specifically defined (large area, low hp, open spaces, high combat)

Not to say that it's impossible at all. back to a previous post, level 1 wizard first night prevents one combat, garners surprise in 2 more, waxes 2 combats with sleep, creates oil fire patch with familiar is very good for 3/4 a days work. But also note, every one of those instances was not any exploder mage or iron mage anything. a lot of tricks and very careful application and specifically looking for ways to expand the effect of what was available. I felt like it was impactful, and so did the rest of my party. My DM clearly did, because he was getting all uptight about minor illusion. I also had less of an issue with niche protection - lots of thugs.

there was some of this with 4e too, because the new model for a wizard was fairly different from the previous model.

 

[MrMyth]

while i might disagree with KarinsDad about a lot of this thread, I don't disagree here. It's not archer, and specifically for the reasons he stated. They get kinda meh damage due to the lack of a stat mod. Not to mention their range is not that good.

Yeah - I think they can bring some useful ranged capabilities to the table (multi-target Acid Splash, the ability to slow + kite with Ray of Frost), but the damage being so unpredictable is definitely a big deal.

Now, can you build a wizard that occupies that archer role? Sure, once you've got a bit more potency in your cantrips and have picked up some feats or so. But I think both the Warlock and Sorcerer can fill that role much, much better.

So the question is, what does the wizard bring to the table over those other options? I think a lot does go back to the classic element of the wizard's versatility. Sorcerers don't get a ton of spells known. Warlocks have a couple very precious spell slots, and while they can recharge them, that is still a definite limit. Whereas a wizard has the room to both learn conditional utility spells, and has the slots to cast them when needed. (Or break them out as rituals.) They also have a pretty broad spell list.

And stepping beyond that, they then have a broader range of options for their class specialization. 8 schools, each of which can support some rather interesting play-styles. I certainly like the Sorcerer options - the Dragon path is great for raw damage, while Wild Magic keeps every session exciting. But I feel I can build much more unique characters within the Wizardry Schools.

 

[raleel]

So the question is, what does the wizard bring to the table over those other options? I think a lot does go back to the classic element of the wizard's versatility. Sorcerers don't get a ton of spells known. Warlocks have a couple very precious spell slots, and while they can recharge them, that is still a definite limit. Whereas a wizard has the room to both learn conditional utility spells, and has the slots to cast them when needed. (Or break them out as rituals.) They also have a pretty broad spell list.

And stepping beyond that, they then have a broader range of options for their class specialization. 8 schools, each of which can support some rather interesting play-styles. I certainly like the Sorcerer options - the Dragon path is great for raw damage, while Wild Magic keeps every session exciting. But I feel I can build much more unique characters within the Wizardry Schools.

While i don't disagree they have more versatility than sorcerer and warlocks theoretically, they are practically limited to a couple of choices early in the levels. Clerics and druids, being divine casters, have A LOT of versatility at level 1-4 - they have access to the full list of spells every day! Also armor and shapechanging and real weapons. not to mention several amazing spells at those low levels that really carve their niche well (bless, cure wounds, faerie fire, guidance)

A big reason that I've asked in other places about scroll placing policies - it's darned important for a wizard to have a very large complement of spells to pick from, otherwise they really end up getting the shaft in the versatility department. To match the clerical spell complement by level 20, a DM needs to be dropping 2-3 scrolls of spells that the wizard doesn't know per level. Just to match. That, and he just needs to have all the rituals as quick as he can, as well as good opportunities for use.

 

[Sailor Moon]

I don't think some of you really understand the idea behind 5th edition because I am seeing roles and overlap being brought up. The system was not designed around roles and how each class needs to bring something different to the table. Damage overlap is never a bad thing, and just because you don't do as much damage as the guy next to you, doesn't mean yours is of less importance.

 

[Sailor Moon]

You may do less damage than an archer, but your ammo doesn't run out and you aren't relying on a bow when it comes to your cantrips.

 

[steeldragons]

sounds like you need to do one of a couple of things. A: play a new game where the wizard is up to your standards. B: roll up a new character that isn't a wizard. Sounds like you don't like the wizard or what it has to offer, it sucks but there is literally nothing you can do if you want to accept what is printed in the book, other than send wizard's a detailed message why they need to retcon their wizard (which I highly highly doubt will happen) or C: make up your own wizard homebrew and present it to your DM and try and get him to let you play it. Those are literally the only possibly solutions to your problem. It sounds like arguing isn't going to get anywhere with you as you simply shoot down EVERY single approach from others describing what wizards are and what you can do with them.

So those 3 are basically it. Have fun!

QTF.

Can't PM you, Evenglare. So putting it here.

THANK YOU!

This has needed saying, oooo, about 30 pages worth of thread now.

 

[Stalker0]

You may do less damage than an archer, but your ammo doesn't run out and you aren't relying on a bow when it comes to your cantrips.

I would imagine in most games this would not come up too often (less than 5%). In some games it could be a major factor, but I would reckon its not common in standard gaming

 

[Sailor Moon]

I would imagine in most games this would not come up too often (less than 5%). In some games it could be a major factor, but I would reckon its not common in standard gaming

Well the game assumes ammo is being used and tracked. Also, a bow can get taken, knocked out of your hand, etc...

 

[KarinsDad]

Well the game assumes ammo is being used and tracked. Also, a bow can get taken, knocked out of your hand, etc...

Although what you state is possible, it just sounds extremely unlikely. Can you let us know how often since 5E came out did an archer run out of ammo or had his bow taken away in your game? I haven't seen it in 5E at all. I'm sure that it has happened at some tables, but it sounds like it would be a relatively rare event.

 

[aramis erak]

Although what you state is possible, it just sounds extremely unlikely. Can you let us know how often since 5E came out did an archer run out of ammo or had his bow taken away in your game? I haven't seen it in 5E at all. I'm sure that it has happened at some tables, but it sounds like it would be a relatively rare event.

I've had it happen twice. My players are tracking ammunition. Which is why the assassin has 5 quivers now. He doesn't want to run out again.

your smug "nobody plays that way" assertions get really old, by the way. Especially since they're so often wrong.