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

[ECMO3]

Why Wizards, then? If Gandalf was called a Bard, Druid, Warlock, Sorcerer or Cleric, would you say those classes should be more powerful than others? He has about as much to do with those as with the D&D Wizard.

Perhaps, but he wasn't called those things and while the LOTR example is really the epitome of the argument, I would argue the theme is pretty consistent across most magical fantasy literature.

The original 1E AD&D DMG suggested reading Tolkien for inspiration (among other books) and the original Halflings were actually called Hobbits, so I would disagree with the assertion that Tolkien has nothing to do with a D&D Wizard Thematically.

 

[James Gasik]

For those who think random chance or terrible consequences for using magic is the way to go-

Grod's Law: You cannot and should not balance bad mechanics by making them annoying to use.

If you do commit this practice, the inevitable results are:

• The disruptive munchkin ignores it, argues it, or forces the rest of the group to suffer through it. His power remains the same, and he gets more annoying to play with.
• The inappropriate powergamer figures out how to circumvent the restriction. His power remains the same.
• The reasonable player either figures out how to circumvent the restriction (rendering it moot), avoids the class (turning it into a ban) or suffers through it. His power remains the same and/or his enjoyment goes down.
• The new player avoids the class or suffers through it. His enjoyment goes down.

 

[Baron Opal II]

Wizards are and have been my favorite class. 90+% of my characters are wizards. (As I think of it, my second favorite are fighters, then thieves. I can only recall ever playing two clerics, a cleric/magic-user in Living City and an assassin/cleric way back in the day. Huh.)

The ease at which wizards solve problems can make them boring to play. It's like using a machining shop when everyone else is using sticks and mud. Accomplishing something with limited tools feels so much more clever than applying one of the ten pre-made answers in your bag.

It's interesting that you mention this. I think wizards are certainly meant to solve problems with a spell. The first level wizard with sleep is a great example- you can solve one combat encounter that day. The issue is which one is the best to solve this way?

Your last sentence I find jarring- finding orthogonal solutions with the spells my character has is part of the fun. You don't always have the right spell for the situation; sometimes you have to drive screws with a hammer, so to speak. But, I hope I address your salient point below.

I've reordered the following list a bit.

Too many spells in the spellbook.

Yes. Gaining two spells per level for free is too many. I’ve found many to most of the complaints about wizard’s versatility addressed by restricting free spells to one per level gained. This squelches Magical Thief and Fireball Gunship nicely. If it is really important that the wizard replace the thief, they can do that but then that and only that is what they do. That’s a valid choice, but they don’t have much flexibility beyond that.

To gain more spells they either have to research them, which drains gold, search ruins for old spellbooks, or target other magicians. Plot hook!

Too large of a spell list.

I think this is an appropriate strength. The other arcane spell casters should be restricted as to theme given their origin. That said, however, I have made guilds where there are “only” 12 spells per level available. These are the spells that they can gain easily. While several are shared between guilds (Protection vs. Evil, Detect Magic, &c.) many are tied to a guild and considered theft if someone from outside the guild uses them. Plot hook! It should be strongly avoided, of course, that the character have access to every spell on their list.

How many should the others have access to? "Half", strongly themed to their bloodline or patron. Not cripplingly so- there should be an interesting blend. The summoner can have fly, but they do so by being carried by an entity they call from outside their reality. A byakhee, preferentially.

Being able to overcome just about all challenges.

I see this as a feature, not a bug. The wizard, compared to the fighter, carries the Easy Button. The balance should come from there is a limited number of times it can be used and it is not always applicable. (See Too Many Spells above)

Another limitation is that it doesn’t fix the situation for the whole party. Fireball cures many ills, but fly only lets the wizard cross the chasm. Now, certainly, the wizard can affix a rope, ferry people, &c., but that’s not necessarily an Easy Button fix. The wizard is, for at least part of that operation, alone. They will have to deal with complications on their own. Certainly, if there are 8 problems and they’re all one-and-done by the wizard’s 8-10 spells at that level that’s a problem. The goal should certainly be that the wizard has a number of useful tools, but not a tool for every situation and be able to use it. It’s a team game.

Force spells are an exception. I’ll talk about that below.

Stealing the spotlight from other PCs/players.

I mostly hear this about the Magical Thief. While that’s a valid choice, if you are stepping on another’s player’s toes that needs to be acknowledged. That’s a time for a Rule #1 talk. If the wizard is simply carrying the party all the time, then the number of spells known, magic item access, encounter type/ balance/ number all need to be looked at.

Cantrips are an issue.

Yes. The main issue I have here are, as expected, are the combat cantrips. Cantrips shouldn’t ever do more, or even equivalent, damage as a first level spell. Personally I think they should be limited number per day as well (Stat Mod + Proficiency per day).

For me, spamming guidanace is irritating if only for it interrupting the narrative. Limiting the number per day does address that issue, however. I have no issues with people being clever with thaumaturgy or prestidigitation, but I do remind them that it’s a cantrip and weaker than a first level spell.

Spells are too powerful.

Some, certainly. I think that resilient sphere (5th) is a well designed spell as it can be either offensive or defensive. If used offensively it is simply a pause on one creature while the rest of the situation is handled. Importantly, while it can’t hurt you, you also cannot hurt it. Force cage not so much. Although, it is 7th level and disintegrate is 6th, so there’s that.

I am planning on instituting that force spells have a certain hit point value dependent on the level of spell, and perhaps cast level. If you hammer on the wall of force long enough it will come down, but I also want it to be useful for bursting dams, tidal waves, and similar issues. Still thinking about that and how to rule it.

Wish I think is fine, although I use the guidelines from 3.5e. I've found them excellent guidance, and interesting to extrapolate from.

While I disagree with some conclusions, hopefully I have made some suggestions to address what others find amiss.

 

[Mind of tempest]

This is true whether Charles is a Wizard or a Fighter or a Rogue and in my experience it has not been a Wizard doing this at a table yet.

And while the media is different, at the root they are both trying to tell a story and it is that story is supposed to be entertaining for those partaking in it.

the root is irrelevant it is a whole different thing, is rugby and football the same thing?

yes it can happen with any class but the wizard is seemingly built for it and it makes the game and the wizard worse.

 

[Baron Opal II]

• Find familiar,
• LTH,
• Simulcrum,
• Wish
• Hypnotic Pattern
• Forcecage
• Wall of Force
• True Polymorph

I don't understand the issue with most of these. I can see issues with tiny hut and force cage. I've changed the former but haven't had to make a decision yet on the latter.

The real problem I think is that these spells are all "I win" buttons when they're they're not targeting monsters/NPCs, because they don't have a roll.

My suggestion is we make casters roll.

I don't have a problem with this in principle as long as it isn't a chance to have the spell function at all.

Coming up with a scheme to see how many targets are affected, a range of volume, sure.

Edit: Oh, I still use the aging from spellcasting. Right now it only really matters for raise dead when the cleric asks the party "why should I give up a year of my life for this person?" It gives pause.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I would disagree with this if you pay attention to the details in the books and put them in perspective. Gandalf is dominating almost everything whenever he is present. When we see others being heroic it is largely because Gandalf is absent. In D&D parlance they split the party and he took the more important mission, that is when the non-Wizards are the center of the attention in LOTR

my point here isn't 'is gandalf dominating the scene' but 'is gandalf dominating the scene because he's using wizard magic', also add on the fact that gandalf explicitly feels like a DMPC or high level character carried over from a previous campaign, he is Part Of The World in a way that the rest of the fellowship really aren't.

He is even dominating social situations - just look at the magical fireworks and Bilbo's party at the begining of FOTR. Imagine you were playing Frodo or Pippin at Bilbo's party - are you really going to suggest Gandalf did not outshine you? As a matter of fact he got angry the one time someone else at the party used magic and was the center of attention (when Bilbo disappeared at his party) ..... and it was Bilbo's party!

Gandalf magically freed Theodin from his curse. When they were holed up in Helms Deep Gandalf took his presumably charmed horse and rode it with unatural speed to go find the renegade Riders of Rohan and free the siege at Helms Deep, appearing back again at just the right time.

At Rivendell, Gandalf led the discussions on what to do with the ring and made the final decision to keep it with Frodo for the trip to Mt. Doom.

None of the other characters did or could have done many of those things and on the other hand Gandalf could largely have accomplished most of what they did do (prophecies surrounding the ring itself notwithstanding). If Gandalf was not at Theodin's court no one would have freed him from the charm, but on the other hand if Gandalf was at Weathertop instead of Aragorn, I think they would have done at least as well, maybe better even. Frodo would have almost certainly made it to Rivendell quicker and in fact it was Gandalf that put the magical flaming horses on the river that swept away the orcs chasing Frodo and ultimately secured his passage. Literally, he showed up and fixed an otherwise dire and challenging situation when other characters were struggling and one was about to die.

The ONLY times Gandalf did not steal the show when he was present is when he had Pipin climb the tower to light the signal fire (I guess he was out of 3rd level slots).

lets address the things you point out here from the perspective of gandalf as an actual character
-fireworks: a particularilly good production of an alchemist's tools, possibly boosted by a background feature of entertainer: fireworks shows, cool but ultimately irrelevant to the actual plot
-bilbo's vanishing: correct me if i'm wrong but isn't the reason he gets ruffled in that scene because magic rings are dangerous and he's already suspect of that ring being The One Ring so he knows the dangers using it entails
-freeing theoden, okay yeah this is genuine spellcasting 'dispel magic'
-calling shadowfax: yes this could be summon steed but at the same time 'i once helped the king of the horses and we have been close friends ever since' sounds like the events of a previous campaign bleeding over
-fetching the riders of rohan: fetching an NPC faction who you have previously assisted
-rivendell talks: a high charisma/diplomacy roll/bonus or the DM guiding the plot with their DM character, parhaps a knowledge check to see if he knew how it could be destroyed
most of what gandalf does isn't because he's using magic, most of what he achieves could be accomplished by any character with a decent enough INT and CHA scores, a bit is because he's already famed in story too, he isn't dominating the scene because he's 'magic' but because he's gandalf

 

[Krachek]

I think that the key element to resolve here, is the need to have all classes being effective game changer in any aspect of the game, been exploration, social or combat.
Trap in the bottom of an out of time pit, in front of opposing lords, facing numerous demons, all classes need to be able to turn the tide in the favor of the party. Not by favor of the DM, or the help of other players, but by their own written features.
That won’t be easy, martial classes need to stay on mundane term, and not using any magical or super heroic power.
We got a lot of work to do!

 

[Vaalingrade]

I know the desire is for 'in game examples', but the wizard issue extends beyond the game and into the design space in how the Wizard class shapes the game.

Because wizards have spells that just say 'I win' if the target fails a save, we have Legendary Resistance, which is the monster just getting to ignore the rules entirely and say 'no', only this blanket denial ability doesn't actually care if it's deflecting the instant win buttons or other effects, so the monster can deny a Forecage that would end the encounter, or the Stunning Fist that would put it on the backfoot without being an auto-win.

Then there's niche protection. If there's one thing D&D loves more than using ten dollar words when penny words would do, it's artificially make one class more important in doing it's thing than anyone else without massive back bending. Well while the fighter is good at 'damage' (supposedly Combat, but just wait) and the rogue is good at skills (to the point they're the only ones who can somewhat mitigate RNG), the wizard is good at Spells... which do anything. Like including 'Things skills do' and 'combat what is not damage'. There's no focus, just 'spells and all the things they do'.

Which is even more of a problem when you have a bunch of other spellcasting classes, which now aren't allowed to be Best At The Spells They Do, because the Wizard has to be Best At Spells. And this niche is defended by the ferocity of a lion. No other spellcasters get to be good at anything involving magic because that is the Wizards' Thing. We've seen that time and time again, to the point it's a miracle the poor Sorcerer survived three editions.

And then there's an issue I've been seeing a long time, but only this cursed Year of Our Lord 2022 has given me words to describe it: the NFTification of magic. Essentially, like NFTs, the only value some people put on magic is scarcity. This means magic items are harder to get, fantastic abilities need to be tied to discreet magic instead of fantastic concepts, and there should be a hard limit on how much magic gets into the game.

I feel it's a negative thing in general, but when you remember the wizard is Best At Magic, it means the wizard gets to eat first at the much smaller magic trough. And wizards themselves are also limited in how magical they get to be because they are now defined by the thing that 'needs' to be scarce. That's why all this kerfluffle about cantrips: actually being magic all the time isn't scarce, therefore being super magical isn't magical because the NFT isn't worth as much.

In conclusion, the problem with the wizard is bigger than the wizard; it's about what the wizard represents and encourages in the game.

 

[Clint_L]

I just don't see that there's anything fundamentally wrong with the wizard class. Folks aren't flocking to take them, and they are widely considered a very good class but not broken. I think the underlying premise of this thread is incorrect.

Arguments about super high level spells and abilities don't really sway me much with regards to wizards or any other class. Very, very few games are played at that level, and just about every class can be overpowered in the right circumstances at 20th level. Game balance at that level is completely out of whack just in general.

For the vast majority of games that people are actually playing, wizards are fine. Most of the proposals for how to "fix" them seem like solutions in search of a problem.

 

[ECMO3]

lets address the things you point out here from the perspective of gandalf as an actual character
-fireworks: a particularilly good production of an alchemist's tools, possibly boosted by a background feature of entertainer: fireworks shows, cool but ultimately irrelevant to the actual plot

In the book it is specifically enhanced by magic if I recall correctly, it is not simple alchemy or a background. More to the point you can say this about any spell.

-bilbo's vanishing: correct me if i'm wrong but isn't the reason he gets ruffled in that scene because magic rings are dangerous and he's already suspect of that ring being The One Ring so he knows the dangers using it entails

Sure, but this is the only other character to dominate the scene in a comparable way.

-calling shadowfax: yes this could be summon steed but at the same time 'i once helped the king of the horses and we have been close friends ever since' sounds like the events of a previous campaign bleeding over

I think he pretty much stole the horse and then traveled faster than any normal horse could travel. While it may not have mentioned a spell it was implied and as I recall the King did not just give it to him because they were friends.

-fetching the riders of rohan: fetching an NPC faction who you have previously assisted

Which he was able to do because he magically acquired and buffed a horse.

-rivendell talks: a high charisma/diplomacy roll/bonus or the DM guiding the plot with their DM character, parhaps a knowledge check to see if he knew how it could be destroyed

Just like the Friends cantrip or enhance ability.

most of what gandalf does isn't because he's using magic, most of what he achieves could be accomplished by any character with a decent enough INT and CHA scores, a bit is because he's already famed in story too, he isn't dominating the scene because he's 'magic' but because he's gandalf

He is a Wizard dominating the situations. And it is ok. That is the relevant point.

Also while Wizards have a truely awesome spell selection, they have limits on prepared spells and limits on spells in their book unless the DM gives them piles of money, downtime and scrolls available. A 20th level Wizard only has 44 spells in his book (45 if he is a necromancer) unless the DM made more available and provided the time and money to transcribe them. Of those 44; 8 are 1st level spells and he can only prepare 25 of them (plus signature spells).

For comparison a 20th level Cleric has on the order of 125 leveled spells available to prepare depending on subclass and he has 35 of them prepared on a given day.

So the Wizard class may have an "answer for every situation" available on its spell list, but Wizard characters do not have anything close to this available in play.