Wizards, nerfed or not?

[Jack99]

There is no doubt in my mind that the wizard has been nerfed. But when you have been god-mode for several editions, you need to be, if some sort of balance is to be achieved.

However, saying that the wizard is below par or weaker than the other classes is very wrong, at least according to both my experiences as DM and as a player. Yes, the wizard can't solve every issue by himself no longer, but neither can any of the other characters.

His AoE spells can easily make him the character that does the most damage, if that is what you want.

His control spells are great (Using the illusions from eDragon does help a lot) although I do think there could be some improvement regarding certain status effects.

His dailies can more than any other dailies (perhaps except a certain warlord lvl 1 daily) change the outcome of a battle.

He can easily achieve a very high AC without giving up any attack power.

His skill selection is very useful (the best? I do not have my books) for knowing what spell to cast on what monster.

The utility in the rituals (which he gets easier than anyone else) just adds another notch to the fact that the wizard is far from useless.

Anyway, it's early and I am hung over, so I probably missed something.

But the wizard is not underpowered.

 

[Gothmog]

Having played one wizard (15th-17th level one shot), and seen two played up to 8th level, I have to say the wizard is still on the high end of the power scale in 4e. He's not as overpowered at the 3.x wizard, but he's still a force to be reckoned with.

Now, if you're expecting the 4e wizard to dish out huge amounts of damage to multiple targets, you'll be disappointed. As others have said, his main role in 4e is battlefield control and modification, moving enemies around/restricting enemy mobility, and imposing nasty conditions on other creatures. Warlocks are better at strict damage dealing, but you can lack a warlock in the party, and not miss much. Missing a wizard in a group can have dire consequences- not only for dealing with minions, but also for impairing enemies and incapacitating them quickly.

The wizard has one HUGE edge on all other PHB classes- he can choose two daily or utility powers when he gains new powers of those types, and have access to either one depending on what he is prepared for. This is a big deal that makes the wizard extremely versatile, much moreso than the other classes.

Plus, lets not forget that the wizard is more than likely the party's ritual magic master, and the wizard has the ability, if played well, to be very powerful and invaluable.

I'd expect to see a LOT more options presented in Arcane Power that will make wizards even more invaluable. Let's face it, wizards are a staple of fantasy, and the 4e designers know that and how much they are loved. The 4e designers gave wizards a solid base, and I predict wizards will see a pretty big bump and a lot of love in Arcane Power. I wouldn't be surprised to see wizards have options to burn their lifeforce (healing surges) in order to empower their spells (kinda like metamagic feats), among many other options.

 

[Ahglock]

It always amazes me when I see someone claim that Wizards are weak, much less "the weakest". So I am tempted to ask why you think that. Have you played one? Because they sure seem mighty powerful in my experience.

Things have to be set up for them almost too perfectly for them to be decent. They do weak sauce damage to a group, but since there is friendly fire, its ends up being just weak sauce damage way too often. There control side effects are fairly pathetic, and probably contribute the least to the parties success. They have a couple powerful dailies like flaming sphere or stinking cloud, but outside of that they just do less damage with less beneficial side effects on there powers.

Basically wizards are too dependent on me as the DM setting up good area of effect situations for them in order to be a good class or even a balanced class. No other class is as dependent on me shaping the opponents and the tactics of the opponents in order to be effective.

 

[Derren]

Wizards were nerfed big time in 4E. In previous editions they had lots of options and could represent many types of wizards. In 4E all a wizard can do ist blasting things with area effects or stunlock things.

 

[CapnZapp]

Wizards were nerfed big time in 4E.

And for that we are thankful!

 

[CapnZapp]

Things have to be set up for them almost too perfectly for them to be decent.

I agree they are probably a little too weak now.

But that does in no way change how it was good, nay absolutely necessary, to nerf the 3E spellcasters. (And not just the wizard - if 4E had had a Sorcerer it would have been massively nerfed too)

So, yes, it's not perfect, but it's much better. Perhaps Wizards will rectify the Wizard in Arcane Power?

 

[smdmcl]

I don't think wizards were nerfed at all in 4th edition. Especially at low levels where they are more survivable and have more options in combat.

Now spells (1/3 of the PHB in 3rd edition), on the other hand, were beaten down hard for all of the casting classes. Something I welcome wholeheartedly.

 

[CapnZapp]

So, even though 4e Wizards are way better at 1st level than they used to be, are they still the red headed stepchild? And how does that effect them as they gain in levels?

No stepchild.

Now they're a completely functional class among functional classes.

They're neither weaker at low levels nor massively over-powered at higher ones.

The fact Wizards happened to make the Wizard one of the less powerful classes (mainly that they didn't go far enough with its controllery powers) is a bit of a shame of course, but it has nothing to do with this.

Any real differences are orders of magnitude smaller than in previous editions, and from a 3E viewpoint they will certainly appear perfectly balanced.

So you don't need to worry. In 4E you can have a wizard and you can skip him. Either way there's no danger of your campaign becoming lop-sided

 

[CapnZapp]

I don't think wizards were nerfed at all in 4th edition.

I believe the OP is comparing to previous editions. When you look at the powerhouse of a level 10+ 3E wizard, of course the 4E class is "nerfed". (Considering the class without its spells is pointless IMHO. The Wizard were his spells!)

I think it's best to consider the 4E Wizard a completely new class and not simply a new version of the 3E Wizard.

The old archetype of a frail old man who can wipe the board clean of enemies if his allies only keep him alive long enough is gone. In its stead we have a class more or less equal to any other class.

 

[Byronic]

I think the important question to ask is:

"How powerful is the Wizard in 4th edition compared to the other classes?"

This question is important because power and other things would be relative to the system they're in.

I must say, I do miss some aspects of the Wizard. Something about the new one doesn't feel as "Wizard" And no, I'm not talking about being able to kill everything in one blast.