D&D 5E Sell me on Wizards

[Dausuul]

When you pull out the big guns, they should actually do something above and beyond what other PCs are doing with melee attacks.


Magic Missile. Yes, I hit automatically. But the Monk with his Flurry of Blows averages more damage. His ability refreshes with a short rest, my ability refreshes with a long rest (and yes, I know that Flurry is not a ranged attack).

Magic missile sucks except in a very, very few cases (e.g., monsters with resistance or immunity to your regular damage spells, or extremely low-hp monsters where you can kill three at a time). As a high-level wizard, I keep it prepared in case I run into one of those situations, but it's strictly backup. For a low-level wizard, you're much better off with sleep, thunderwave, or burning hands.

Also, could you define "utility" in your view? It gets tossed around a lot and it tends to be "I handle the edge cases", which... well... is that really a role?

Hmm, fair point. The meaning of "utility" varies by class, but in the case of the wizard, I find it mostly boils down to a) transportation, b) deception/manipulation, c) concealment, and d) "handyman" tricks like starting fires or opening doors. In some cases you might add e) battlefield control, though I don't find myself using those spells very often.

I think you are correct that they have more versatility potentially, but wizards DO have to have those spells available. Without scrolls and money in the treasure, the wizard is going to lag behind seriously. If you play once a week, get a scroll once a week, and level every 2 weeks, you are JUST matching the cleric's spell selection. Granted, yours may be more versatile and hit a million edge cases, but he does have that whole healing thing that you are missing entirely.

In my experience of playing 5E wizards, I have never once found a spellbook or scroll that I could transcribe. I've been playing entirely with the basic allotment of 6 starting spells, plus 2 each time you level up. In the end, it's not that big a deal. You prepare just as many spells as the cleric, and most of the time you'll keep basically the same loadout from day to day. The choice of which spells to prepare is far more painful than the choice of which to put in your spellbook. And, as I said, the spells you get are much more versatile than anything in the cleric's armory.

Here's an example of how I might do spell selection for a 5th-level wizard, assuming Int 18. This is just going off the Basic Rules since I don't have my PHB handy:

SPELLBOOK
Cantrips: Fire bolt, light, mage hand, minor illusion
Level 1: Charm person, detect magic, disguise self, identify, mage armor, shield, sleep, thunderwave
Level 2: Levitate, suggestion, invisibility, hold person
Level 3: Fireball, counterspell

PREPARED SPELLS: Thunderwave, charm person, mage armor, shield, sleep, levitate, suggestion, invisibility, fireball

SPELL SLOTS: 4 1st-level, 3 2nd-level, 2 3rd-level

STRATEGY: For most encounters, use minor illusion early to distract and confuse. Once the enemy wises up, switch to fire bolt. If you see an opportunity, use sleep or thunderwave on clustered enemies. Look for people with access to secure areas or valuable information, and cast charm person on them. Invisibility can do wonders for the rogue's scouting and infiltration. It can also help you escape when things go pear-shaped. Cast detect magic as a ritual to pick out valuable loot.

When facing large groups of melee enemies, levitate and fireball are a devastating combination--hover out of reach and lay waste from above. Suggestion, skillfully used, can sow chaos among your foes by making them turn on each other. Shield should be used sparingly; don't cast it just to save yourself a couple hit points, but an actively casting wizard with one less 1st-level spell slot is better than a fully charged wizard lying on the ground unconscious.

If you know you're going to be facing an enemy caster, consider swapping one of your lower-level prepared spells for counterspell. If you expect to be tackling a big dumb foe with lousy Wisdom, hold person is worth considering. Disguise self has its limits but can sometimes be very useful indeed, especially with a charmed friend to help you carry off the deception.

 

[Shayuri]

Hah! Well that (other players messing up one's plans) is always the risk of playing a tactician...and Wizards definitely encourage that role, no question! Man, I need to start quoting posts I'm responding to. Y'all post too fast!

Hee hee.

So far I've played a sly Illusionist and an Evoker. It's striking to me how differently they played. The illusionist tended to enable the party to just straight up evade encounters with Disguise Self and the use of the Actor feat. He got some decent mileage out of the Minor Illusion cantrip, since illusionists get to basically use it as a smaller version of Major Image...which is sweet. I got to roll Bluffs several times to convince monsters to waste attacks on phantoms. And of course, when push came to shove, he could throw out damage spells too. He's made some use of Suggestion and Phantasmal Force as well...using the latter to kill a guard by tricking him into falling off a wall he was standing on!

The Evoker on the other hand throws out damage first and always. Being able to disregard friendlies in AoEs is a big boon, and means I can cut loose from the back ranks with near-impunity. This is great, especially in situations where targeted attacks are difficult, like with limited visibility or high-AC enemies. This wizard is not subtle, but is still pretty quick to anger.

I would like to try the other arcane schools as well. I have a transmuter coming online in a new game, and I'd really like to give Abjuration and Divination a go. They -seem- pretty good, but I always like to give things a whirl before I judge.

One thing I notice in a lot of posts that disparage the 5e Wizard is a comparison to prior editions. 'In 3.x wizards could do -this- and they can't anymore,' and so on. Yet, I have found for my own sake that when I judge 5e on its own merits, rather than try to fit it into the mold of what has gone before, I have few complaints so far. Oh, a few to be sure, because I am a nitpicker and even a little hypercritical at times, but I've been pretty impressed with the party dynamic in 5e in my games so far.

I will say this though, as an olive branch to those dissatisfied with 5e wizards; a lot of the reason I've liked them as much as I have is because I've had GM's who appreciate and encourage creative play. GM's who enjoy it almost as much as I do when I hoodwink a guard into thinking I'm an orc officer, or when an ogre not only wastes a haymaker on an illusion but totally flubs his Perception check (opposed by my Bluff to make the illusion 'dodge') and thinks he just missed and is so mad that he then tries AGAIN before figuring it out.

A GM who takes a harder line will make wizards a lot less fun, because so much of what makes them fun is not spelled out line by line in the rules.

 

[raleel]

Magic missile sucks except in a very, very few cases (e.g., monsters with resistance or immunity to your regular damage spells, or extremely low-hp monsters where you can kill three at a time). As a high-level wizard, I keep it prepared in case I run into one of those situations, but it's strictly backup. For a low-level wizard, you're much better off with sleep, thunderwave, or burning hands.


Hmm, fair point. The meaning of "utility" varies by class, but in the case of the wizard, I find it mostly boils down to a) transportation, b) deception/manipulation, c) concealment, and d) "handyman" tricks like starting fires or opening doors. In some cases you might add e) battlefield control, though I don't find myself using those spells very often.


In my experience of playing 5E wizards, I have never once found a spellbook or scroll that I could transcribe. I've been playing entirely with the basic allotment of 6 starting spells, plus 2 each time you level up. In the end, it's not that big a deal. You prepare just as many spells as the cleric, and most of the time you'll keep basically the same loadout from day to day. The choice of which spells to prepare is far more painful than the choice of which to put in your spellbook. And, as I said, the spells you get are much more versatile than anything in the cleric's armory.

Here's an example of how I might do spell selection for a 5th-level wizard, assuming Int 18. This is just going off the Basic Rules since I don't have my PHB handy:

SPELLBOOK
Cantrips: Fire bolt, light, mage hand, minor illusion
Level 1: Charm person, detect magic, disguise self, identify, mage armor, shield, sleep, thunderwave
Level 2: Levitate, suggestion, invisibility, hold person
Level 3: Fireball, counterspell

PREPARED SPELLS: Thunderwave, charm person, mage armor, shield, sleep, levitate, suggestion, invisibility, fireball

SPELL SLOTS: 4 1st-level, 3 2nd-level, 2 3rd-level

That's good to see. I think I would pick a little differently at first level, and maybe some of the other ones, but not much. My cantrip loadout would be very close - I might swap light for something else, and mage hand vs unseen servant as a ritual is kind of a tough choice for me. I to tend towards a bit more battlefield control - fog cloud and grease are both in my list. But it seems like that the playstyle has not changed much, just some stuff has been flattened a bit. I'm still pretty concerned about concentration. I do understand the need for something like that, but... oy. You get one battlefield effect or a buff or a debuff in many cases.

I also agree, Magic Missile is a poor choice for a level 1 spell slot. yea, it auto hits, but... meh damage. There are better uses for that.

Speaking of "handyman" tricks - how about caltrops + an AOE that does the whole start/enter thing, like grease? Save vs grease, if you make that, you don't slip, but you have to save vs caltrop. if you DON'T make that, you stop your move, take a point, and are forced to make another save against grease. If you don't make it against grease, you slip and fall and STILL have caltrop damage, and have to crawl out, fighting grease to escape. Same sort of thing with ball bearings - fall prone after you have spent more movement than it takes to get up and get out, and you are hitting them again, potentially repeating the effect in a sort of cartoony inability to leave. THAT is battlefield control. Hunting traps too. Seems like until you are trotting out bigger guns, having a supply of oil and bags of metal bits

 

[Shayuri]

I'm partial to Dancing Lights, but that's cuz I often play elf wizards. For a human Light is better.

I also like Magic Missile, but not because it does good damage. It's just a reliable, long range spell. Great for people behind cover, or hiding in concealment...great for popping spellcasters way in back who are concentrating on a spell you don't like.

For damage at level 1 I am fond of Burning Hands. Which is funny because I hated it in 3e.

Oh, how the Wheel turns and turns...

 

[TwoSix]

I'm having a great time with the game. I just happen to roll lousy dice a lot and the DM rolls good saves a lot. So a lot of my spells fizzle. Using multiple spells for Mage Armor and Shield and not even being anywhere near the rest of the party AC-wise seems like a waste as well. So yeah, when one is not happy with the cantrips and the defensive spells, that's the majority of the combat rounds.

Honestly, I think the best approach is simply to forgo Mage Armor and Shield. Then one of two things happens:

1) You manage to hide in the back enough to only get hit infrequently, and have more slots available to do more wizardly things.
2) You attract enough attention where you get hit enough to kill you, leaving you the freedom to reroll a less-defensively challenged character.

Sounds like a win-win to me.

 

[Dausuul]

One thing I notice in a lot of posts that disparage the 5e Wizard is a comparison to prior editions. 'In 3.x wizards could do -this- and they can't anymore,' and so on. Yet, I have found for my own sake that when I judge 5e on its own merits, rather than try to fit it into the mold of what has gone before, I have few complaints so far. Oh, a few to be sure, because I am a nitpicker and even a little hypercritical at times, but I've been pretty impressed with the party dynamic in 5e in my games so far.

I find that the 5E wizard reminds me very strongly of what it was like to play a mid-level (5th to 10th or so) wizard in AD&D. Carefully managing a limited pool of spell slots, looking for creative ways to get the most out of your spells, hanging back and waiting for the right moment rather than blasting away from the get-go... it's a challenging class, but a lot of fun for those who enjoy such things. The main difference is that AD&D wizards were much weaker at low levels and much stronger at high levels. And, of course, they didn't get at-will cantrips.

A GM who takes a harder line will make wizards a lot less fun, because so much of what makes them fun is not spelled out line by line in the rules.

This is true. DMs who run D&D as a tactical skirmish game, and come down hard on any attempt to do something not clearly laid out in the rules, make wizarding very dull and ineffective. Illusion magic in particular is highly DM-dependent. A DM who's determined not to let you mess with his carefully planned encounter can more or less negate your illusions just by refusing to let monsters fall for them.

 

[KarinsDad]

Honestly, I think the best approach is simply to forgo Mage Armor and Shield. Then one of two things happens:

1) You manage to hide in the back enough to only get hit infrequently, and have more slots available to do more wizardly things.
2) You attract enough attention where you get hit enough to kill you, leaving you the freedom to reroll a less-defensively challenged character.

Sounds like a win-win to me.

Actually, I think that I am going to take this advice. I probably won't hang back too far, but having an extra 2 or 3 spells per day will be worth the risk. I'll let the 3 PCs who can heal cast heal spells instead of protecting myself. Thanks.

 

[TwoSix]

Actually, I think that I am going to take this advice. I probably won't hang back too far, but having an extra 2 or 3 spells per day will be worth the risk. I'll let the 3 PCs who can heal cast heal spells instead of protecting myself. Thanks.

I think getting back to "We need to protect the wizard!" away from "Why isn't the wizard protecting us?!" is a worthwhile old-school flavor change.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

For someone who likes playing a defensive utility wizard who is willing to not hide in the back, 5E has stamped out that concept completely. Such a PC doesn't have the resources.

That sounds like a feature, not a bug. The ability to survive in the front line is a big deal; it takes some actual character build choices to attain, not just a couple spells. As you noted in this thread, a single level of cleric or fighter would get you plenty of AC.

 

[KarinsDad]

I will say this though, as an olive branch to those dissatisfied with 5e wizards; a lot of the reason I've liked them as much as I have is because I've had GM's who appreciate and encourage creative play. GM's who enjoy it almost as much as I do when I hoodwink a guard into thinking I'm an orc officer, or when an ogre not only wastes a haymaker on an illusion but totally flubs his Perception check (opposed by my Bluff to make the illusion 'dodge') and thinks he just missed and is so mad that he then tries AGAIN before figuring it out.

A GM who takes a harder line will make wizards a lot less fun, because so much of what makes them fun is not spelled out line by line in the rules.

No doubt. We just had a scenario where the human fighter and dwarf cleric were wearing NPC bad guy plate armor, so they were easy for the rogue to disguise. The gnome ranger/wizard had just learned disguise self from my PC (made himself look like a kobold). My wizard with disguise self and the rogue with his disguise kit along with some NPC uniforms made themselves look like enemy officers, and the halfling bard we had as a "prisoner". We just waltzed in. Sometimes ordering flunkies about, sometimes reporting to superiors. Course, the DM had superior officers give us commands that ended up splitting the party up into 3 groups of 2, but sometimes, that's how it works out.

So yes, when the players have a rough idea in advance of what non-combat spells they need for a given day, a DM that encourages creative play can get some good results. But having the right spells at the right time is sometimes not possible.