D&D 5E So it looks as if the mountain dwarf will still make the best overall wizard.

[Plane Sailing]

Looks to me like the mountain dwarf will still come out being the best overall wizard.

Best? No.

Best for one particular style of wizard? Perhaps.

An interesting choice? Certainly.

 

[The Black Ranger]

Isn't it far more likely that the party is escorting a non-combatant? Would you take a risk of targeting a doddering old man with an oak staff (for example) then the knight in full plate who is currently stabbing you?

Mind you, by round two the wizard has started hurling spells and maybe tactics change.

But in the first round, you focus on the largest most immediate threats.

"Quick, we're being overrun by armored knights! Train your arrows on the old man cowering behin--!" (Can't finish sentence because STABBED.)

If I was a ranged attacker, I wouldn't be engaging the melee guys to start with, I would let my melee guys take care of that.

Why do some people try and steer combat into a direction that we know it doesn't travel in?

 

[The Black Ranger]

Best? No.

Best for one particular style of wizard? Perhaps.

An interesting choice? Certainly.

Well why not?

 

[Joe Liker]

Wizards are not super-common in most settings, so it's faulty logic to say the monsters will immediately suspect anyone not wearing armor of being a wizard. If the baddies are expecting a wizard to show up, then yes, it makes more sense.

But if a group of invaders just shows up at their cave, and the guys with swords are obviously trying to cut heads off while the guy in back hasn't even acted yet, I would consider it unfair and unreasonable for those monsters to target the squishy just because they can kill him faster than they can kill the guys with the swords who are an immediate, obvious threat.

 

[The Black Ranger]

heavy armour proficiency = feat at level 4.
combat caster = feat at level 8
add to intelligence (to 17 = +3; woo?) = ability boost at level 12
add a shield = feat at level 16.

Sure, it's possible. But it will take a lot of work to convince me that this is the way to build the best overall wizard.

lose lose I say.

There is no shield proficiency on that last so I am going to assume it's a part of armour proficiency.

 

[The Black Ranger]

Wizards are not super-common in most settings, so it's faulty logic to say the monsters will immediately suspect anyone not wearing armor of being a wizard. If the baddies are expecting a wizard to show up, then yes, it makes more sense.

But if a group of invaders just shows up at their cave, and the guys with swords are obviously trying to cut heads off while the guy in back hasn't even acted yet, I would consider it unfair and unreasonable for those monsters to target the squishy just because they can kill him faster than they can kill the guys with the swords who are an immediate, obvious threat.

I am a bowman.

I see a guy in armour amd I see a guy in the back not wearing armour. Wizard or not, he looks to be the most vulnerable. Whether or not he is is not the point.

Some of you act like it takes wearing robes and a pointy hat to become a target.

Wizards being common means nothing unless the encounter envolves enemies who are familiar with spellcasters. That fact that you are not up front in the fray can lead some to speculate that you maybe a juicy target.

 

[jadrax]

Fighters make the best Wizards. They can wear Heavy Armour, Use Shields *and* have larger Hit Dice.

As an added bonus, as Fighters can't do any of that non important spell casting stuff, you don't have to waste Ability Score Increases on Int.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

My point is that all of these ideas about smart creatures will target the Wizard and bring him down first because he is the biggest threat....how do they know hes a Wizard (or other magic user)?

Slinging magic missiles everywhere, spamming flaming bolts, and generally cutting loose with sparkly magicky stuff is usually a good indicator -- in addition to not being in the front line.

Intelligent opponents should generally focus on the most dangerous targets they can identify first, whether by attempting to bypass the front line (melee combatants, sneaky ambush rogue-types), using missile weapons, or concentrating their own magical fire on enemy magic-users. They might not attack a wizard in the first round if no magic has been launched, but the first time a flashy spell goes down their tactics should adjust appropriately.

PC tactics in response include protecting said most dangerous targets. The opportunity attack/AoO mechanics really help the PCs here since it makes it harder to just blast past the front line to get to the back line.

 

[amerigoV]

I have not looked at the numbers (and I am not really going to play much 5e anyway) but:

1) Wouldn't the PC need a decent Strength not to be encumbered? (so moving points to Str instead of Int or Con)

2) Plate is usually the most expensive non magical item you can get. Presuming wizards still need to spend money on Spellbooks, where is the cash coming from? That money is probably better spend getting more spells for the spellbook long-term.

3) I think the Fighter is going to be grumpy if the Wizard tries to abscond with the first set of Plate the PCs get as loot.

I really do not have a problem with the concept, but I doubt we are going to see a bunch of Wizards running around in Plate at L1. (and if one did, it would be a good time for swarms of Rust Monsters to come out for their once a decade mating extravaganza).

 

[Xodis]

Slinging magic missiles everywhere, spamming flaming bolts, and generally cutting loose with sparkly magicky stuff is usually a good indicator -- in addition to not being in the front line.

That is explained and used as an example further down on the post you quoted me from.