D&D 5E What Level is the Wizard vs. the Fighter?

[jmartkdr2]

I've heard ideas like this before and always liked it.

To make it sound player-friendly: give bonuses for unused attunement slots- for full casters, it's more spell slots. For monks, it's bonuses to unarmed strikes. Warlocks might get bonus invocations. Fighters and rogue might get bonus techniques.

 

[Blue]

Did I even offer a description???

In the thread you started about "Chris said why I don't like Fighter vs Wizards" or something like that.

Anyway, I mean being able to do something, anything, that can completely turn an encounter or even an adventure around.

Sure, but that's not Power in the slightest. If character A can do something big once and never do anything else, and character B can regularly do something 1/3 as good, and will have 10+ chances to do it, character B absolutely has more power while character A has more "shenanigans".

 

[DND_Reborn]

Sure, but that's not Power in the slightest.

I disagree. It is the power to affect the encounter or adventure with a single "thing", a shenanigan, or even multiple things. That is power.

Maybe not to you, but frankly this is the second time you've argued semantics over it while others have been responding. I explained to you once in the other thread what I meant there, and now again here. If my description and posts are not sufficient for you, I'm not going to waste time going over it again and again.

And FWIW, I didn't start that thread. @HammerMan did.

 

[Lanefan]

Out of curiosity, what level does the fighter become the scary juggernaut against the party?

No specific level in this case, just a slow steady build-up over time.

That said, in a more general sense it's at whatever level that a) their AC gets good enough that the other PCs almost can't touch them and b) they somehow acquire resistances or immunities* to the PCs' other usual tricks.

* - the most important of which by far is Free Action. Not sure if 5e has nerfed this but in my game Free Action means you can't be grappled, restrained, bound, paralysed, held, or otherwise restricted in your movements other than by natural limitations of the surrounding environment (e.g. wearing heavy armour still slows you down, you're still restricted if the physical space you're in is too small, etc.)

 

[Lanefan]

Between Invisbility, Blur, Levitate and other spells neither hit points no AC is of much concern if the wizard can't be hit or can stay out of range of the enemy and still blow it away.

Provided you can get those spells away before the Fighter is on you like a ton o' bricks; and this plays into my take that if casting spells while in melee is made impossible the balance meter swings much closer to even.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Well, after 40 voters here is how the numbers work out. (1 voter had to be removed because he only voted once... sigh...):

11 out of 40 voters (27.5%) voted 1, 10, 20; indicating they see no difference between fighter and wizard at those levels.

Including them, the others cause the averages to be decreased roughly 75% of the fighter level equals the wizard level, so 0.8, 7.56, and 14.68 would be the wizard levels equal to fighter levels 1, 10, and 20, respectively.

Without the 11 of 40, and just counting those who feel there is a difference, the averages are closer to about 67% +/- 5% of the fighter level equals the wizard level, so 0.724, 6.656, and 12.655, with the % decreasing at higher levels.

FWIW, there was one outlier on the low side, voting 0,1,3; but even compensating for that the numbers round to 1, 7, and 13 still.

We'll see how many more people vote and I'll update the numbers if we get a significant number of more voters.

 

[Neonchameleon]

To me there are two and a half major issues here.

• The fighter basically gets no new abilities between level 11 and level 20. And they've mostly already reached Str 20 and had their first choice (and thus best) feat by level 8.
• Out of combat (and with most of the subclasses) the fighter is basically a commoner with nothing that helps.
• The Champion subclass of the fighter sucks and shouldn't even be given to newbies.

The first issue is a big one but barely taken account of by the question. (The level 11 3rd attack is good but after that? More Indomitable? More feats that weren't good enough at low level). Two level 11 wizards are going to struggle badly against a single level 19 - but two level 11 fighters? Yes the level 19 has more hit points, two extra proficiency bonus, and an extra use of Action Surge. But not a whole lot more than that. Fighters basically stop scaling.

The out of combat issue is pretty major (unless you're e.g. an Echo Knight). You have a commoner's set of skills with your proficiency bonus and ... not a lot else. It starts to fall behind when the wizard can cast Fly and make most of the fighter's athletic skills seem like a second choice. There's another huge place the fighter falls behind IME at level 9 when the wizard gets to rearrange the terrain permanently with Wall of Stone with a snap of their fingers and some concentration. Something that would take the fighter days of effort and tons of raw material.

 

[Shiroiken]

This is pretty straightforward: 1, 10, and 20. Fighters (and other non-full casters) are just as powerful as wizards (and other full casters) at pretty much every single point of play. If you feel they're not, it's likely because your DM is doing it wrong. Each class has its own strengths and weaknesses, and each contributes to the group in different ways (even if a few classes like the ranger, monk, and sorcerer are slightly behind the curve overall).

 

[Aldarc]

The wizard then complains to WotC that the fighter's climbing ability breaks his verisimilitude.

WotC then grants the wizard their wish and then either buffs wizards and/or nerfs fighters.

 

[TheSword]

The reality is that dealing large amounts of damage to a single foe is the most useful ability in the game. It’s useful in most encounters, in most environments, and at every level. Similarly the ability to take damage and hits is almost as useful.

A wizard is much more powerful when they have a fighter between them and the enemy. I am gobsmacked that 13 people think a 1st level fighter isn’t streets ahead of a wizard at level 1. When a wizard gets 2 1st level spell slots and is basically a walking bag of death saves. I smell an ideological agenda, rather than engaging with the reality of playing a wizard at 1st level.

It’s worth noting that the fighter can also have 4th level wizard spells at 20th level. Can also fly already for some races and have a host of other abilities through an abundance of feats. For those that want those abilities.

The truth is that being able to use shenanigans appeals to some players and some players just want to kick the living $#!¥ out of something. I’m ok with that. [Edit] It probably would have made sense in the OP to make it clear whether you were talking about power or shenanigans. Comparing the two is almost impossible as they’re fundamentally different things.