Spell Attack Rolls

[andhaira]

So certain spells use spell attack rolls, either ranged or melee. The roll is always 1d20 + Ability Mod + Proficiency Bonus usually vs target AC.

My question, does the Wizard have any bonus to this kind of attack as in previous editions? For instance, in 3e spell attacks were typically touch attacks, ranged or otherwise, and thus ignored armor bonus to armor class. However in 5e there is not such bonus to casting these sorts of spells. So a wizard has the same chance of hitting someone with Firebolt as a Fighter using a bow.

Is this correct?

[SharkForce]

pretty much.

why would you need a special bonus? in previous editions, the wizard had an awful attack bonus. 2nd edition had melf's acid arrow (and a few other spells) make the attack rolls with a fighter THAC0, 3rd edition used touch attacks, 4th edition wizards basically never target any form of AC that I can think of (I think it's the only defence I don't recall them having a spell that can target it), and 5th edition just gives the wizard the same attack bonus as anyone else.

if wizards still had an awful attack bonus, it would be needed. but it isn't.

[odigity]

Yes. 5e made the following changes:
- all spell attacks are merely melee/ranged attacks, just like the martials
- all spell attacks work off spellcasting ability (Int/Wis/Dex) rather than Str/Dex, which lets spellcasters be competent
- no more touch AC concept
- every class gets the same "base attack bonus" (proficiency bonus now) by character level

Which means now all classes (including spellcasters) have the same potential baseline power level in terms of ability scores and attack bonuses. The martials only rise above via use of specific class abilities, like fighting styles, rage, combat maneuvers, etc.

So, spellcasters are finally competitive attackers, which is nice.