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

[HammerMan]

The fighter still pulls ahead with damage at 20th level, it's just not as far ahead as at mid levels. At 20th level you can get spells off in half the round of combat. Assuming save or suck spells and at DC of 19, 50%(or more depending on save stat) of those are going to be saved against by CR 20 creatures and never work at all, and half of the ones that are successful will only be successful for 1 round. So your wizard is only going to be useful in 8, not 16 of the 32 rounds of combat, and then for only 1 round in 4 of those 8 that actually work.

I can't beleive I have to say this... but if there is even a chance that 1 action from a wizard is effective for 2 rounds isn't that already showing a big discounnect from the fighter?

And a DC 19 can be anywhere from a breeze to an almost can't make... with bounded accuracy even CR 20+ can have a +2 or +3 save or two... now it isn't guaranteed to always be able to target the right save (and legendary resist throws more of kink into tryng to figure out what can and can;t work) but to think that the argument that "That 1st level spell might only stop the enemy from attacking for 1 round not many" is at all a thing seems weird to me...

The fighter is going to be trucking along dishing out lots of damage in each round.

again that is the 1 thing (well one of 2 things cause they can take damage too just not as well as a self healer or barbarian) they excel at doing damage... the problem is that a few big damage spells can catch the wizard up, and even if the wizard NEVER throws a damage spell they have many other ways to circumvent or ignore combat encounters... and outside of combat the fighter chasie doesn't have soemthing wizard doesn't

 

[Maxperson]

But that's my point. The adventuring day is not exclusively a 5e problem. Every WotC edition, and arguably every edition ever has suffered from it. And yet, no solutions have even been ventured, and they've never even really discussed it, even though fans must have brought to their attention at some point. Given their track record, why would it be any different in 6e?

That's not true for 3e. 3e with it's true save or suck and save or die spells and effects on both sides meant that it wasn't about resource management over several encounters. I could, and did, routinely match up one single encounter to challenge the entire group without TPKing them, because the game wasn't balanced around hit point/resource depletion. I can't do that with 5e. One encounter that could survive 4 PCs going all out and then dish back is going to TPK them.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's not true for 3e. Three with it's true save or suck and save or die spells on both sides meant that it wasn't about resource management over several encounters. I could, and did, routinely match up one single encounter to challenge the entire group without TPKing them, because the game wasn't balanced around hit point/resource depletion.

The 5 minute work day was invented (or at least popularized) in 3e. A lot of people seem to think that was and is a problem, in all fairness

 

[HammerMan]

That's not true for 3e. 3e with it's true save or suck and save or die spells and effects on both sides meant that it wasn't about resource management over several encounters. I could, and did, routinely match up one single encounter to challenge the entire group without TPKing them, because the game wasn't balanced around hit point/resource depletion.

The 5 minute work day was invented (or at least popularized) in 3e. A lot of people seem to think that was and is a problem, in all fairness

yeah 3e being better balanced is not something I have ever heard before (at least not since 2002ish) it is an interesting take. With the nuclear rocket tag of SoD effects there may be a style of play that is true for.

 

[Maxperson]

The 5 minute work day was invented (or at least popularized) in 3e. A lot of people seem to think that was and is a problem, in all fairness

It was generally a self-created issue. Keeping the world moving while the party constant rests makes for resting that often being a bad idea. If everything else stopped while the party rested, then sure, the 5 minute work day was a problem.

 

[Maxperson]

yeah 3e being better balanced is not something I have ever heard before (at least not since 2002ish) it is an interesting take. With the nuclear rocket tag of SoD effects there may be a style of play that is true for.

Um, I didn't say better balanced. I said 3e was not balanced around hit point/resource management like 5e. 3e didn't have the problem 5e has where you have to have 6-8 encounters in an adventuring "day."

 

[tetrasodium]

yeah 3e being better balanced is not something I have ever heard before (at least not since 2002ish) it is an interesting take. With the nuclear rocket tag of SoD effects there may be a style of play that is true for.

The big difference was that 3.x had 4-6 encounter expectations rather than o5e's 6-8. That huge shift meant that it was plausible to regularly hit & that asomewhat tougher fight could meaningfully tax the party. The shift to recovery mechanics go further in making o5e's already basically unreachable expectation into a virtual guarantee of 5-7mwd as the norm

 

[HammerMan]

That's not true for 3e. 3e with it's true save or suck and save or die spells and effects on both sides meant that it wasn't about resource management over several encounters. I could, and did, routinely match up one single encounter to challenge the entire group without TPKing them, because the game wasn't balanced around hit point/resource depletion. I can't do that with 5e. One encounter that could survive 4 PCs going all out and then dish back is going to TPK them.

Um, I didn't say better balanced. I said 3e was not balanced around hit point/resource management like 5e. 3e didn't have the problem 5e has where you have to have 6-8 encounters in an adventuring "day."

I mean you didn't use the word better. You did say you could and did routinely match up to challenge the entre group with out tpk BECUSE the game wasn't balanced around hp/resource depletion. so I inffered you meant better in this case.

 

[Voadam]

While I strongly disagree with some of the more nuclear options being proposed, I do find it odd that WotC has never even tried to address the adventure day problem.

I think 4e's development of everybody having encounter based powers, healing surges being able to be spent in between combats, and regaining expended action points after two encounters was a deliberate move to encourage parties to keep going in a dungeon environment instead of a five minute work day. It still had daily powers and full healing on a long rest, but I think it was a conscious design step to addressing the daily resource base of pre-4e spells.

 

[DND_Reborn]

To me 4E's design based on number of encounters seems to contrived and forced to really like the approach, but that is just my preference. I never got to play it so if I had I might feel otherwise.