D&D 5E so, mountain dwarf wizards...

[Xodis]

... 1 point of DC and ...

In such a low point game, I think this might mean more than you think. If both characters go for the 20 INT goal, that means the Elven Wizard will also get a feat to choose from when the Dwarf picks his stat increase to 20. We have no idea how colorful these feats will be as of yet. As always, magic items will also throw this out of whack as the Swarf can grab the +armor, but Wizard Robes will always benefit casting.

 

[jaycrockett]

I don't mind sub-optimal characters, if they are fun. What I mind is worthless characters. The way the math worked in 3e it was just very easy to create a crappy character. I always felt bad for one of my players who after 6 or so levels of rogue wanted to dabble in wizard. I accommodated her as best as I could but just couldn't get around the fact she was mechanically nerfing her character.

From what I've read so far in Basic 5e I'm hoping there will be less to worry about and you can just focus on a character that sounds cool.

Now, I'm off to see if I can make a character with a whip work...

 

[Dausuul]

An 18 Int wizard versus a 20 Int wizard at the same level will cast the same number spells per day, with only a 5% (read: minor) drop in spell effectiveness (DC and attack), one fewer point of damage as an evoker, and a grand total of one fewer spell prepared each day. All said and done, I consider this to be a fairly insignificant difference that wouldn't likely be noticed at the table.

The loss of a prepared spell will be. When I was playing a wizard in the playtest, I was always making painful choices in spell prep.

Anyway, whatever you feel the "minimum" Int is for your wizard, it's going to cost the human and the high elf one less stat boost to get there, which means they're ahead of you by a feat. (In fact, the human is ahead of you by two feats.) You'll certainly feel that difference.

 

[doctorhook]

The loss of a prepared spell will be. When I was playing a wizard in the playtest, I was always making painful choices in spell prep.

Anyway, whatever you feel the "minimum" Int is for your wizard, it's going to cost the human and the high elf one less stat boost to get there, which means they're ahead of you by a feat. (In fact, the human is ahead of you by two feats.) You'll certainly feel that difference.

Colour me unconvinced about the one spell. I believe you would feel the difference: perhaps magic should feel like it comes more naturally to an elf or human character and that a dwarf wizard has had to "work harder at it". I think the tradeoff could be roughly worth it; a dwarf wizard will and should feel a bit more padded in a fight, given the extra HP and armor.

 

[CM]

In early 3e I had a recurring dwarf sorcerer NPC named Stonebrother Lomar. All he had was earth- and stone-related spells. It'll be interesting what he will look like once the PHB is released.

 

[doctorhook]

In early 3e I had a recurring dwarf sorcerer NPC named Stonebrother Lomar. All he had was earth- and stone-related spells. It'll be interesting what he will look like once the PHB is released.

I love it! I mentioned upthread that I think there's a lot of traction waiting to be claimed sitting at the thematic intersection of dwarf, earth elementalism, and rune magic. Wizardry could be a great framework for that.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Now, I'm off to see if I can make a character with a whip work...

Rogue, with 1-3 levels of fighter (to taste). Woodelf, lightfoot halfling, or alt-human.

 

[Quartz]

Why would an adventurer in 5E want to use Heavy Armour anyway? You get Disadvantage on Stealth and more. And Breastplate + Dex will get you the same AC anyway. Sure it will be useful for mooks.

And if you do want Heavy Armour, can't you just multi-class to Fighter for a level? (Note, I only have the Basic Rules PDF.)

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I've never thought of "spellcasting in armor" as a system balance mechanism-- and it's quite obviously not, since it's been "broken" by both clerics and elven chain since the inception-- but rather as a bit of system designed (punitively) to enforce tropes of the genre.

Not just elven chain -- BECMI elves and 1E multi-classed elven and half-elven magic-users could cast in any armor. The single-classed magic-user lacked armor proficiency, and the illusionist required more mobility so multi-classed gnome fighter-illusionists could only wear up to leather and still cast.

The "any bit of wizard = no armor" was really a 2E and onward thing.

 

[evilbob]

Why would an adventurer in 5E want to use Heavy Armour anyway?

Well plate is the highest AC you can get with just an armor, technically. Only 1 higher, but still higher. Also dex penalties don't apply to heavy armor, so anyone with an 8 in dex might like it. (And you're not likely to care about stealth rolls anyway with an 8 in dex.)

Minor reasons, though, yes. Medium gives a lot more variety.