D&D 5E What is REALLY wrong with the Wizard? (+)

[Vaalingrade]

Well, yeah, nothing makes your wizard look awesome than someone else's non-caster being a sidekick. Moreover, D&D has actively cultivated this mentality, which is why it's more common in older players who gripe about powerful martials being too anime. Anyone who wanted a better caster/.non-caster balance played other systems. Gygax voiced that the "serious" players graduated to magic-users, so them being a cruddy training wheels class was intended. The triumph of the nerd over the jock and caster supremacy were baked in.

People act like I'm making it up when I talk about how much designers and veteran players disrespect new players, but it was there from the start, baked into the culture, just like the jackhole DM.

 

[ECMO3]

This issue is individual spells of an individual wizard but the lack of restrictions. Because the wizard with

1. Alibaba's Awesome Abjuration
2. Calamitus's Crazy Conjuration
3. Dyno's Powerful Divination
4. Egg's Great Enchantment
5. Eg's Excellent Evocation
6. Illya's Sick Illusion
7. Sandro's Broken Necromancy
8. Tucker's Hot Transmutation

is good at all 8 schools. "But those spells don't exist."

Stop beating around the bush, I want you to provide an example build of a 1st level wizard that is good at all 8 schools of magic .... using real published spells and Wizard class abilities (and nothing else).

 

[ECMO3]

I would lock some wizard spells behind school specialization,


The issue again is that all but 2 tools could be potentially in the toolbox with no restrictions.

Not with just class feastures they can't. That is just patently false. They are limited to 2 spells per wizard level plus 4 more 1st level spells they get at first level.

That is a hard limit on what tools they have based on what is afforded by the Wizard class.

To compare to a toolbox - they can have a saw or a hammer or a wrench or a screwdriver but they can't have all 4 based on what is provided by the class, which ensures their toolbox will never be very full.

 

[ECMO3]

Second flaw-The Big One: The game world does not scale up. This has been a problem starting in 3E. Up to 5th level it's just a "normal rocky cliffside", after 5th level you MIGHT find a published "more challenging" cliffside, but likely not. And so THAT is the huge problem. At like 10th level the DM is like "there is a cliff" and the player of the wizard just half asleep says "whatever, zip, my wizard flies to the top". Why? Because it's just a rocky cliff.

This is a strawman for several reasons.

To start with, it assumes the Wizard both has Fly in her book and has it prepared. I have played many Wizards but only 2 total even had fly in their book. I am playing one of them right now and she does not even have it prepared (she has Summon Shadowspawn, Fear and Counterspell prepared instead).

Second a Wizard's flight in many ways is inferior; it is concentration which means just a single hidden archer could make her plummet to her death with a bad con save. Now she could have feather fall prepared too as a failsafe, but now she has two spells in her book and prepared to let her fly to the top of the cliff.

Finally, a 3rd level slot is a high price to play to accomplish this when it is available on numerous races at 1st level and available to all Druids without using a slot by 8th (and some Druids earlier). Further unlike a Wizard's Fly spell these methods are a lot safer with only a small risk of plummeting.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Stop beating around the bush, I want to provide an example build of a 1st level wizard that is good at all 8 schools of magic .... using real published spells and Wizard class abilities (and nothing else).

Then provide it.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

To start with, it assumes the Wizard both has Fly in her book and has it prepared. I have played many Wizards but only 2 total even had fly in their book. I am playing one of them right now and she does not even have it prepared (she has Summon Shadowspawn, Fear and Counterspell prepared instead).

Just because you didn't, doesn't mean that nobody else doesn't.

And let's be honest: What wizard doesn't get a spell that basically trivializes any terrain based challenge? Either from getting it by leveling up or by buying/finding a scroll and copying that into their spellbook?

Second a Wizard's flight in many ways is inferior; it is concentration which means just a single hidden archer could make her plummet to her death with a bad con save. Now she could have feather fall prepared too as a failsafe, but now she has two spells in her book and prepared to let her fly to the top of the cliff.

Yeah, there's always an archer parking themselves around every cliff/gorge that exists just to shoot anybody who casts Fly down.

I wonder how much that job pays.

Finally, a 3rd level slot is a high price to play to accomplish this when it is available on numerous races at 1st level and available to all Druids without using a slot by 8th (and some Druids earlier). Further unlike a Wizard's Fly spell these methods are a lot safer with only a small risk of plummeting.

And then the Druid gets shot by the same archer that's hiding near the cliff. Not only that, but because the bird they're turning into probably doesn't have a lot of health, they are now guaranteed to be plummeting to their death, rather than having to make an easy save that any spellcaster worth their salt is gonna have things to help them pass that save, like high Constitution, Proficiency in Constitution saves from Resilient, and/or just straight up advantage on concentration saves from War Caster.

And on choosing a race that gets a flying speed, you must not be aware of the occasional kerfuffles that happen whenever a player chooses to be an Aaracokra, the only race that gets a flight speed at 1st level (that I'm aware of, at least). And when it comes to the other races that can get a flight speed, tell me the average level that they get that flight speed, because I can guarantee you it's at or around the same level that spellcasters can start casting Fly.

 

[soviet]

This is a too common response: if you scale up the game at all it specificity targets the martials and they become useless. And SURE you COULD do that......but you could also not do it.

The whole cliff area is in an anti magic field, the martials just SHRUG and climb up the cliff. The cliffs are full of archer bushes...well, the martials just fight them. Same with the flying foes. There are thousands of ways to scale up a world that does not directly attack the martials.

To be honest I'm not sure I'm too keen on my fighter climbing up this cliff either. All these archer bushes and flying enemies sound like great opportunities to fail a climb check and fall off. I have no real advantage over a caster in that situation other than probably a higher Athletics check and more HP. The casters can choose to fly or climb depending on the circumstances; I can only climb or perhaps be carried.

Though a couple rules do work out great. One I use in my game is: You declare whatever thing you want to do and make an attack roll against your opponent. If you get a hit, the opponent has the choice to either let the maneuver happen, or take the regular damage of the attack per normal rules. And this simple rule works out amazingly. It lets martials attempt to do nearly anything.

But surely if the opponent has the choice, they will always just take the damage unless the effect of the manoeuvre would be less relevant than the damage (or they are on very low HP)? So this rule either does nothing or actively helps the opponent more than the attacker?

 

[Minigiant]

Not with just class feastures they can't. That is just patently false. They are limited to 2 spells per wizard level plus 4 more 1st level spells they get at first level.

2 spells per level pus 4 more 1st level spells is enough to get access to most of the important effects in the game.

It doesn't grant the ability to have to the strongest version of every effect at once without help but you can get a pretty full library.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

2 spells per level pus 4 more 1st level spells is enough to get access to most of the important effects in the game.

It doesn't grant the ability to have to the strongest version of every effect at once without help but you can get a pretty full library.

and also you can copy from scrolls and other spellbooks.

This isn't even really an optional rule either. It's in a sidebar in the PHB under the Wizard and right next to the section about preparing and casting spells.

And I will say, as much as I rag on Wizards for being like, the de-facto best class in the game, if I'm DMing for one I'm not gonna take this whole thing away from them, either directly (Just saying "No you can't copy stuff into your spellbook") or indirectly (Not putting in scrolls/spellbooks as treasures or stuff you can buy in shops) because that's a heavy handed way of "fixing" the Wizard and it's also lame.

 

[ehren37]

This is a too common response: if you scale up the game at all it specificity targets the martials and they become useless. And SURE you COULD do that......but you could also not do it.

The whole cliff area is in an anti magic field, the martials just SHRUG and climb up the cliff. The cliffs are full of archer bushes...well, the martials just fight them. Same with the flying foes. There are thousands of ways to scale up a world that does not directly attack the martials.

The wizard can fight the bush too. So can the bard, paladin, etc. "Fighting" is something everyone in 5E does basically equally well, to the system's detriment.

Also, get out of here with this "anti-magic field" nonsense. I've seen them a grand total of ZERO times in published 5E adventures, and maybe a handful in pre 5E (most of them being Challenge of Champions adventures which are specifically about disabling the class and relying entirely on player puzzle solving). The caster apologists trot this out like they're rolling a d6 at the start of every encounter and on a 1 its "whoops, wandering anti-magic field in effect".

This is the common answer: 10,000 more pages of rules.

Though a couple rules do work out great. One I use in my game is: You declare whatever thing you want to do and make an attack roll against your opponent. If you get a hit, the opponent has the choice to either let the maneuver happen, or take the regular damage of the attack per normal rules. And this simple rule works out amazingly. It lets martials attempt to do nearly anything.

"Lol just do whatever" isn't the great rule system you guys seem to think it is. If I wanted a system based almost entirely on DM fiat, I would play one of the many 3 page systems out there. Why is it good for casters to monopolize 1/2 the players handbook with codified rules, but too much to ask for half that in feats of martial prowess and mythic skill usage?

 

[ECMO3]

Just because you didn't, doesn't mean that nobody else doesn't.

And let's be honest: What wizard doesn't get a spell that basically trivializes any terrain based challenge? Either from getting it by leveling up or by buying/finding a scroll and copying that into their spellbook?

Most Wizards I have played with do not have this spell either prepared or in their book and the reason why is Wizards almost universally want Fireball and Counterspell. After that either Fear or Hypnotic Pattern. Then finally Haste, Lightning Bolt, Lemund's Tiny Hut.

All these spells are WAY more popular than Fly (even though a few of them shouldn't be) and if you want to get them you aren't getting fly, especially at 5th level used in the example.

That is not to say a Wizard can't have fly and if she knows there will be a lot of cliffs maybe she picks it and is able to minimize that adventure (or maybe she just plays an AAracora if she knows this ahead of time).

The point is Wizards are not routinely doing that. I think in the 7 years I have been playing 5E I have never had a PC Wizard cast fly to overcome an obstacle like this. I have had an NPC cast it on party members, but never a party Wizard, and there have been plenty of cliffs, castles, buildings etc that we have had in game. Usually we teleport up them through some fashion, or climb them.

And if the Wizard is doing that at 5th level then she isn't also Fireballing the horde of orcs and Counterspelling the enemy Efreet once she gets into the caves at the top of the cliff.

Yeah, there's always an archer parking themselves around every cliff/gorge that exists just to shoot anybody who casts Fly down.

No not always, but it can be devastating when it is. There are many ways to fly in the game, this is not one of the better ones.

Then the Druid gets shot by the same archer that's hiding near the cliff. Not only that, but because the bird they're turning into probably doesn't have a lot of health, they are now guaranteed to be plummeting to their death, rather than having to make an easy save that any spellcaster worth their salt is gonna have things to help them pass that save, like high Constitution, Proficiency in Constitution saves from Resilient, and/or just straight up advantage on concentration saves from War Caster.

A Quitzalcoutlus has 30hps, Giant Eagle has 26. A single arcer is not going to drop him to his death and if there is a platoon of Archers, then sure they might, but they also might drop the 5th level Wizard to 0 as well since he probably has about the same number of hps .... and that is in addition to making him pass a bunch of concentration saves.

Driving concentration higher than 16 in a point buy game, or getting resilient or War Caster are all going to mean he has less spells to prepare, and a lower save DC, meaning even less "godlike" things he can do, and all of these things combined will still not ensure succcess on a concentration save at 5th level.

If your 5th level wizard started as a custom race for Resilient and an 18 con, then picked up warcaster as his feat at 4th level, then you will be a weak spellcaster. The party warlock, sorcerer or even Bard are going to be better than you will be in combat and you will have a lower AC to boot.

And on choosing a race that gets a flying speed, you must not be aware of the occasional kerfuffles that happen whenever a player chooses to be an Aaracokra, the only race that gets a flight speed at 1st level (that I'm aware of, at least).

Aaracokra, Fairy, Owlin and Variant Tiefling all have flight at 1st level.

And when it comes to the other races that can get a flight speed, tell me the average level that they get that flight speed, because I can guarantee you it's at or around the same level that spellcasters can start casting Fly.

The four races above get it at 1st level. The only other official race I can recall that has flight is the protector celestial which gets it at 3rd level. All of these are earlier than a Wizard can get fly.

 

[ECMO3]

2 spells per level pus 4 more 1st level spells is enough to get access to most of the important effects in the game.

It doesn't grant the ability to have to the strongest version of every effect at once without help but you can get a pretty full library.

You can get a large selection but other classes will be WAY better than you if you do this.

It is not the strongest version you will be missing out on, it is level appropriate levels of power too. The Wizard who gives up Fear and Fireball to get Counterspell and Lemunds Tiny Hut can still do control and AOE damage if she got Cause Fear and Shatter, but not nearly as well as other casters are going to be able to at this level and those two spells - Cause Fear and Shatter when upcast to 3rd level do not trivialize encounters like Fear routinely does and like Fireball can.

I am not saying wizards are not good or powerful - They are the most powerful class in the game. I take issue with the claim that they trivialize every encounter and the claim that players can't have fun with them in the party. These statements are both patently false.

I have only seen 3 players actually die at the table in the last year of gaming. Two of them were Wizards - a 3rd level Diviner hit with a crit with a poision crossbow bolt and was killed with one shot and a 2nd Level Bladesinger/1st level Monk who was downed by a wererat, took a second hit while down and then rolled a 1 on her death save. The Bladesinger/Monk was my character and she certainly could not make the Wererat encounter trivial. I replaced her with a fighter and with that particular party the fighter was much more effective than the Wizard-Monk was.

 

[bloodtide]

I would lock some wizard spells behind school specialization,

That sounds like a good idea to me.

To start with, it assumes the Wizard both has Fly in her book and has it prepared. I have played many Wizards but only 2 total even had fly in their book. I am playing one of them right now and she does not even have it prepared (she has Summon Shadowspawn, Fear and Counterspell prepared instead).

If the wizard character does not have the right spells to cause any of the problems in the OP, then the problem has fixed itself.

Second a Wizard's flight in many ways is inferior; it is concentration which means just a single hidden archer could make her plummet to her death with a bad con save. Now she could have feather fall prepared too as a failsafe, but now she has two spells in her book and prepared to let her fly to the top of the cliff.

The wizards fly spell is superior to the mundane martials that must climb up the cliff. And as I said, using two spells for a single encounter is a good thing as it uses up the wizards limited magic.

Finally, a 3rd level slot is a high price to play to accomplish this when it is available on numerous races at 1st level and available to all Druids without using a slot by 8th (and some Druids earlier). Further unlike a Wizard's Fly spell these methods are a lot safer with only a small risk of plummeting.

Also, as I said, the scaled up world effects all characters, not just the wizard.

To be honest I'm not sure I'm too keen on my fighter climbing up this cliff either. All these archer bushes and flying enemies sound like great opportunities to fail a climb check and fall off. I have no real advantage over a caster in that situation other than probably a higher Athletics check and more HP. The casters can choose to fly or climb depending on the circumstances; I can only climb or perhaps be carried.

Well, it's not about giving the fighter some "big advantage". But note your fighter can climb up the anti magic cliff side no problem. And there are plenty of other types that would have no effect on the fighter, and many with only a lesser effect.

But surely if the opponent has the choice, they will always just take the damage unless the effect of the manoeuvre would be less relevant than the damage (or they are on very low HP)? So this rule either does nothing or actively helps the opponent more than the attacker?

Well, just ignoring everything and taking the damage is one way to do it. Though I should say it works best in a deadly game where all characters can die at any time. A player down to just three hit points might well accept a trip or disarm attempt instead of character death and to stop playing.

And adding in more actions is always a good thing, and can add a lot to the game. IT just depends on your game style.

Also, get out of here with this "anti-magic field" nonsense. I

That is my point though. Nearly everyone, most gamers and published stuff give the wizard a free pass and make things very easy for the wizard. That is their choice, they make the game super easy for wizards, and then sit back and say "oh that is just the way it is" and : nothing can be done".

Why NOT have anti magic be common? Just because the player of a wizard would whine and complain? Let them. Would it be any different then a martial complaing about the wizard "doing everything" or "stealing the spot light"?

Everyone of this play style is more then happy to tell a player of a fighter "well, just sit back your character can't do anything". So why is that so WRONG to say to the player of a wizard or other spellcaster?

"Lol just do whatever" isn't the great rule system you guys seem to think it is. If I wanted a system based almost entirely on DM fiat, I would play one of the many 3 page systems out there. Why is it good for casters to monopolize 1/2 the players handbook with codified rules, but too much to ask for half that in feats of martial prowess and mythic skill usage?

It's a bit more complicated then that....worthy of a thread.

 

[Minigiant]

and also you can copy from scrolls and other spellbooks.

This isn't even really an optional rule either. It's in a sidebar in the PHB under the Wizard and right next to the section about preparing and casting spells.

That's part of point.

Originally the collection of spell to the spellbook was a balancing mechanic as a buff. Now you have to be hesitant on offering scrolls as treasure.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

Most Wizards I have played with do not have this spell either prepared or in their book and the reason why is Wizards universally want Fireball and Counterspell. After that either Fear or Hypnotic Pattern. Then finally Haste, Lightning Bolt, Lemund's Tiny Hut.

All these spells are WAY more popular than Fly (even though a few of them shouldn't be) and if you want to get them you aren't getting fly, especially at 5th level used in the example.

That is not to say a Wizard can't have fly and if he knows there will be a lot of cliffs maybe he picks it and is able to minimize that (or maybe he plays an AAracora if he knows this).

The point is Wizards are not routinely doing that at. I think in the 7 years I have been nplaying 5E I have never had a PC Wizard cast fly to overcome an obstacle like this. I have had an NPC cast it on party members, but never a party Wizard, and there have been plenty of cliffs, castles, buildings etc that we have had in game.

Fireball falls off eventually, Lightning Bolt is a less good Fireball, and Haste as it exists in 5e is made to make the martials feel better about themselves.

You're close with Fear and Hypnotic Pattern though, considering they can both completely shut down encounters with 1 casting, assuming there isn't a martial on your team getting in the way.

I think you just play with people who don't leverage the Wizard's strength well enough.

No not always, but when it can be devastating when it is. There are many ways to fly in the game, this is not one of the better ones.

Yeah, those four times across twelve campaigns.

Driving concentration higher than 16 in a point buy game, or getting resilient or War Caster are all going to mean he has less spells to prepare, and loweer saves, meaning even less godlike things he can do, and all of these things combined will still not ensure succcess on a concentration save at 5th level.

You don't even have to get your Concentration super high, the median concentration save you're probably gonna be hit with is a DC 10. Easy peasy, honestly. And for some people, making sure your spells stay on you, where they belong, is well worth the losing 1 prepared spell for 4 levels.

plus, you know, all the other benefits you get with having higher CON (More HP), Resilient (again, More HP and also better Constitution saves which are one of the most common saves in the game) and War Caster (preforming somatic components with your hands full and also the ability to cast a spell as an attack of opportunity)

A giant Eagle starts at 26hps. A single arcer is not going to drop him to his death and if there is a platoon of Archers, then sure they might, but they would also make the Wizard make many concentration saves, and additionally could kill him too, virtually assuring death.

So hitting the Druid for 26 HP would equal around a DC 13 Concentration for the Wizard casting Fly. Easily doable if the wizard tries at all.

y'know, if we both weren't some flavor of wrong because Druids can't turn into a flying animal until Level 8, not even Circle of the Moon druids. And at level 8, the Wizard has had at most 3 opportunities to grab either extra CON, Resilient, or War Caster.

Aaracokra, Fairy, Owlin and Variant Tiefling all have flight at 1st level.

The four races above get it at 1st level. The only other official race I can recall that has flight is the protector celestial which gets it at 3rd level. All of these are earlier than a Wizard can get fly.

That one's on me then (haven't been playing too much 5e, but the pathfinder forum has a total of 4 unique people going to it per week so I'm stuck here if I want to talk about things)

I'm still pretty sure that Aaracokra, Fairy, Owlin, and V.Tiefling still have DM's not allowing them because of the whole "having flying at first level" thing. That or players don't use them because surprise! Flying is actually really strong! Especially at early levels!.

As for the Aasimar, only one version of them actually gets the fly speed (the others just get cosmetic wings) and even then, it's only for 1 minute once a day at 30 feet per round (as opposed to 10 minutes at 60 ft for Fly for however many times you have spell slots above 3rd) and they only actually get it at 3rd level, which is a lot closer to 5th level than 1st level is.

 

[Incenjucar]

Anti-magic would also shut down other classes, which are not nearly as overwhelming. You also should not have to build so much of a campaign around the specific classes in use. This is especially a problem if you use published works. We don't need every dungeon to be flooded with old school thought eaters.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

It is not the strongest version you will be missing out on, it is level appropriate levels of power too. The Wizard who gives up Fear and Fireball to get Counterspell and Lemunds Tiny Hut can still do control and AOE damage if she got Cause Fear and Shatter, but not nearly as well as other casters are going to be able to at this level and those two spells - Cause Fear and Shatter when upcast to 3rd level do not trivialize encounters like Fear routinely does and like Fireball can.

I am not saying wizards are not good or powerful - They are the most powerful class in the game. I take issue with the claim that they trivialize every encounter and the claim that players can't have fun with them in the party. These statements are both patently false.

Then, in response to the the bolded sections: When have you seen a Fighter completely trivialize an encounter? A Rogue? A Ranger? When have you seen any martial class shut down an encounter the way a Wizard (or any spellcaster really) can?

Yes, Wizards have weak spots, especially in 5e where they have taken good measures to nerf that class down to more acceptable levels, but any smart wizard player will have taken measures to either mitigate those weak spots or remove them entirely.

You can get a large selection but other classes will be WAY better than you if you do this.

It is not the strongest version you will be missing out on, it is level appropriate levels of power too. The Wizard who gives up Fear and Fireball to get Counterspell and Lemunds Tiny Hut can still do control and AOE damage if she got Cause Fear and Shatter, but not nearly as well as other casters are going to be able to at this level and those two spells - Cause Fear and Shatter when upcast to 3rd level do not trivialize encounters like Fear routinely does and like Fireball can.

Also, no Wizard is giving up anything for getting Counterspell, it is a serious contender for "best spell in the game" specifically because it can shut down other spellcasters. And if something needs something that heavy handed in order to bring it down a peg or two, then there is something seriously wrong.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Making different power sources actual different power sources would be a way to make the case for antimagic.

"In this place only nature holds sway. The druid and the ranger can cast freely, the wizard, however cannot because magic is not the same as primal power."

 

[James Gasik]

Making different power sources actual different power sources would be a way to make the case for antimagic.

"In this place only nature holds sway. The druid and the ranger can cast freely, the wizard, however cannot because magic is not the same as primal power."

You know, as a DM, I occasionally tag weak points of builds. If you have no ranged attacks, sure I'll occasionally have a flying enemy or enemy archers. But completely turning off a character by saying "haha, Wizzo, zero magic, go throw darts at people like it's AD&D!".

Yeah, no. If a class is only "balanced" because they have an off switch, then we're back to Paladins losing their powers at the drop of a hat.

D&D is a team game, and everyone has to be able to contribute. Your contribution may go up or down, but turning it to nil isn't fun for you, it isn't fun for the players having to basically fight a man down, and it's not terrifyingly fun for me as a DM.

So I'm not going to target spell foci, components, or spellbooks unless I want to make a point (I think I posted about an incident like this upthread) or for story reasons- and if I do take away your ability to cast spells temporarily, I will make sure you're left with something to do.

The way I see it is this- player comes to me with a cool concept. They want to be a LIGHTNING WIZARD! All their spells do electrical (or maybe sonic to bring the thunder) damage!

Since there's not a ton of these, I might even let them find versions of existing spells that do electrical or sonic damage, like SHOCK SPHERE instead of fireball.

But you know what I probably won't do very often? Use enemies that have resistance or immunity to all their spells. If I know they have a backup plan, sure I might from time to time.

But otherwise, it's like telling the dedicated archer player "welp, better get out your stabby stick, they have a guy who cast wind wall." Doing this from time to time? Sure. Often enough that it shuts down the players fun? Probably not.

Anti-magic zones are just silly. What's even sillier is that if these exist, then that's where all the monsters who are resistant or immune to non-magic weapons would hang out, so they would also be Anti-everything zones!

 

[Vaalingrade]

You know, as a DM, I occasionally tag weak points of builds. If you have no ranged attacks, sure I'll occasionally have a flying enemy or enemy archers. But completely turning off a character by saying "haha, Wizzo, zero magic, go throw darts at people like it's AD&D!".

Yeah, no. If a class is only "balanced" because they have an off switch, then we're back to Paladins losing their powers at the drop of a hat.

D&D is a team game, and everyone has to be able to contribute. Your contribution may go up or down, but turning it to nil isn't fun for you, it isn't fun for the players having to basically fight a man down, and it's not terrifyingly fun for me as a DM.

I'd agree, but we're talking about the wizard, so everything's fair.