D&D 5E (2014) Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards 5e

[jaelis]

Might add too, hypnotic gaze requires your opponent to see or hear you, but not both. So it is totally usable while invisible, and does not break invisibility. That can help a bit with the 5 ft range.

 

[jaelis]

The emergence of Toll The Dead makes this a bit better, as you have a better chance of actually killing something with a necromancy spell.

To pick another nit: Grim Harvest doesn't work with cantrips.

 

[krunchyfrogg]

Amazing to see re-evaluations of the schools on page 93. Perhaps it’s time for another guide?

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

Amazing to see re-evaluations of the schools on page 93. Perhaps it’s time for another guide?

I'm working on a mini guide of sorts where I walk through leveling a concept build from 1 through 20. Starting with a god wizard. Talk about spell preparation level by level etc.

 

[krunchyfrogg]

I'm working on a mini guide of sorts where I walk through leveling a concept build from 1 through 20. Starting with a god wizard. Talk about spell preparation level by level etc.

Wow, that’s be really cool!

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Just a minor quibble: With only 2 uses per long rest, Portent is rather less potent if you actually use the 6 encounters between long rests guideline.

 

[Asgorath]

Just a minor quibble: With only 2 uses per long rest, Portent is rather less potent if you actually use the 6 encounters between long rests guideline.

The DMG doesn't actually suggest 6-8 encounters per day. It simply says that an average party is going to have run dry of all resources if they do that many encounters:

"Assuming typical adventuring conditions and average luck, most adventuring parties can handle about six to eight medium or hard encounters in a day. If the adventure has more easy encounters, the adventurers can get through more. If it has more deadly encounters, they can handle fewer."

Note the use of "can handle", not "must face". 6 hard encounters might map to 2 deadly encounters, for example (with a short rest in between).

 

[Dausuul]

Hmm... I feel like you're underrating phantasmal force. Remember that you can blind somebody with it, and the target doesn't get ongoing saves--you have to make an Investigation check that costs your action. Here's what I see when I read phantasmal force:

The target makes an Intelligence saving throw. If it fails, it must choose one of the following:

• The target is blind for 1 minute, no save.
• The target is blind and can't take actions for 1 minute. At the end of each of its turns, it can make another saving throw to end the effect. Effects that impose disadvantage on ability checks can be used on this saving throw.

Also, the target takes 1d6 damage per round. Because screw you.

Seems pretty darn sweet for a 2nd-level spell... especially since it targets what is for many monsters a stunningly weak save. Lots and lots of stuff has Int well down in the single digits, resulting in an Int save of -2 or worse. Few monsters have a significant bonus.

 

[jgsugden]

Hmm... I feel like you're underrating phantasmal force. Remember that you can blind somebody with it, and the target doesn't get ongoing saves--you have to make an Investigation check that costs your action. Here's what I see when I read phantasmal force:

The target makes an Intelligence saving throw. If it fails, it must choose one of the following:

• The target is blind for 1 minute, no save.
• The target is blind and can't take actions for 1 minute. At the end of each of its turns, it can make another saving throw to end the effect. Effects that impose disadvantage on ability checks can be used on this saving throw.

Also, the target takes 1d6 damage per round. Because screw you.

Seems pretty darn sweet for a 2nd-level spell... especially since it targets what is for many monsters a stunningly weak save. Lots and lots of stuff has Int well down in the single digits, resulting in an Int save of -2 or worse. Few monsters have a significant bonus.

This is a spell that gets a lot of discussion, and a lot of people disagree on how it should be resolved.

You're creating an illusion in the mind of the target that the target believes to be real. The illusion has everything, but only to the target - not to you or the rest of the PCs in your party. You see nothing.

The target can use an action to investigate the illusion once it takes hold, ending the spell on a successful investigation check. When it will do this is up to the DM. Some DMs will automatically allow any target to do this, while others will only allow it if the target has cause to study the illusion. As the target believes the illusion to be real, per the text of the spell, there is often no reason for the target to study the illusion.

It only deals damage if it makes sense for the illusion to deal damage.

The target does get actions, and may use those actions to defeat the illusion either by interacting and studying it, or by beating what the illusion pretends to be. In some instances, the target may decide that the illusion is not something they need to focus upon, just as PCs sometimes elect not to fight the Hill Giant when there is a spellcaster behind it.

Also, there is a huge open question as to whether the illusion can move from the place where it is created. However, Sage Advice indicates it can be moved with the target if the target moves, which means to most DMs it can move itself to continue to harry the target if it is a creature, etc... illusion.

The PC can interact with the illusion - which means it may beat the illusion by doing something that would beat a real version of the illusion. For example, if you make the target believe it is being attacked by a giant, and the illusion is caught in a few fireballs, is hit by the target, etc... it may believe the illusion to be killed. If you create the illusion of a wall of fire, it may believe that the wall is doused by a wave of water. If you create the illusion of a sack on the head, it may just take the sack off. You craft the illusion, but you do not control it (unless you have the School of Illusion and sufficient levels - but even then you can't see it to control it in detail).

A crafty player can do a lot with this spell, but it does have limits. In my games, this is a top tier spell, but if you have a restrictive DM, this may only be a mediocre spell.

 

[Dausuul]

A crafty player can do a lot with this spell, but it does have limits. In my games, this is a top tier spell, but if you have a restrictive DM, this may only be a mediocre spell.

Even with a restrictive DM, it's a strong spell (with a generous DM, it's busted as hell). Here's my go-to illusion: "An adamantine helmet with no visor, glowing red hot and bolted tightly around the target's neck."

• I do not have to interact with this illusion at all. I don't have to see it.
• Unless it can shapeshift or teleport or similar shenanigans, the target has no way to get the helmet off.
• The target is blind. This is key: There's a lot of debate over whether and how much the spell can restrict a target's movement, but no one disputes that the spell can interfere with vision.
• The target is taking fire damage.

Does the DM rule that the target starts investigating right away? It doesn't matter. The spell sets up a catch-22: Investigate, and you lose your action every round until you make a difficult Int-based check. Meanwhile, you're blind and on fire. If you don't investigate, you get to act, but you're blind and on fire and you stay that way. Either one of these is an excellent outcome for the spellcaster.

Right here, I have gotten great value for my 2nd-level spell slot (and concentration), for an effect which is solidly within the boundaries of the spell. Anything else the DM wants to give me is gravy.