Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6433746" data-attributes="member: 4937">So far KD hasn't convinced me that 5e Wizards are weak, but rather that they have a problem that they haven't had since 1e.  Namely, that 5e Wizards are narrow rather than versatile.   Basically, if you boil down his argument, it seems to come down to the true statement, "If you don't take the best spell available at each level, for example Sleep, the resulting character cannot influence the combat as reliably as other classes making more optimal choices."It would seem to me that the problem is then that what is lacking at 1e is diverse options for how you influence the combat and not just 1 spell that everyone seems to agree is superior in reliability and potential scope to all the other choices.  The fix would to me appear to be, "Make more alternative good spells so that being a low level wizard feels less like you have to be a Hypnomancer.   Or, if those people who know 5e better than I do don't agree, then at least show KD build options that do showcase the wizard's versatility.  There seems to be general agreement that KD's wizard is poorly built, and possibly poorly utilized.  But most proposed solutions seem to either amount to a) choose sleep or b) get a DM that is more flexible with the rules.   Either that or they are conceding he's mostly right, but claiming that it is alright because at N level Wizards rock - an approach to 'balance' I thought we'd agreed since the 1e era wasn't really fun for everyone.  I am not convinced KD is right, but I agree with him that people are providing very little useful contradiction.</blockquote>

Verification