Sorlock vs pure Wizard

[maxwell_wolfen]

As the title says. which one is better for having an OP character?

in my campaign i already have a tiefling sorcerer 10 / warlock 3 and is a blast! But i was wondering if i could make a wizard with somehow nearly the same firepower and utility.
i know that with a wizard i wont be able to quicken Eldrich Blast (and no quicken at all actually) to have great sustained single target dps. But i will have many more spells. Is that "better" than "optimizing with a sorcerer" from your perspectives?
If so can you recommend some good optimized wizard builds?

all ideas and perspectives aroundt that subject are welcome!

[SharkForce]

if you want bonus action damage, have a look at bigby's hand or flaming sphere. either can do the trick.

your at-will may not be quite as high, but you can still deal lots of damage when you need to, if that's what you're aiming for.

[djreynolds]

Spell mastery is sweet 18th and Signature spell at 20th.

Imagine an abjurer wizard, spamming the shield spell, maybe misty step or mirror image.

And 2 3rd level spells at 20th level, say fireball or haste or counterspell and dispel magic basically at will and adding their proficiency bonus to their intelligence check

[Gastronomie]

The answer is "both are good at different stuff".

What you should do is not to compare the Sorlock and pure Wizard. What you should do is to look at your teammates and consider which will be better for filling in the gaps of the current party. If your party already has a Cleric and a Bard, chances are, the Wizard is unrequired and the Sorlock more important for dealing damage. If your party has a pure Warlock, a GWM Fighter and a Sharpshooter Fighter, go Wizard, or perhaps Pure Sorcerer, over Sorlock.

Party balance is infinitely more important than optimization of a single character.

[djreynolds]

The answer is "both are good at different stuff".

What you should do is not to compare the Sorlock and pure Wizard. What you should do is to look at your teammates and consider which will be better for filling in the gaps of the current party. If your party already has a Cleric and a Bard, chances are, the Wizard is unrequired and the Sorlock more important for dealing damage. If your party has a pure Warlock, a GWM Fighter and a Sharpshooter Fighter, go Wizard, or perhaps Pure Sorcerer, over Sorlock.

Party balance is infinitely more important than optimization of a single character.

Perfect summation, what does the team need.

Be that guy or gal, who plays what the party needs. I find it much more fulfilling to do that... than to eclipse another PC.

[maxwell_wolfen]

Perfect summation, what does the team need.

Be that guy or gal, who plays what the party needs. I find it much more fulfilling to do that... than to eclipse another PC.

we have a paladin, a barbarian, a cleric, and a monk
i think we have enough frontal power. my sorcerer is good though. sniping targets with his eldrich blast and so on. but i miss those neat spells the wizard has such as wall of force...contigency.. and i reaally love abjurers for their abilities. We will also surely reach 20 lvl so we will use 9lvl spells.

[Sir cryosin]

With the wizards 18th ability you can pick scorching ray combine with bestow Cruse or hex from any way you want to get it. I think it might be lacking just a bit then a Eldritch blast hex would but it not terrible damage. It better then firebolt.

[Specter]

Wizards dealing damage? No, they won't deal as much as a Sorlock, especially because they do damage spending little to no resource. But wizards shouldn't worry about that. They should worry about being unkillable annoying pests who can destroy any scheme through clever tactics.

I'm assuming you're open to multiclass when going Wizard. Here's the best I have.

- The Immortal Military Wizard
Fighter 2/Abjurer X
Start Fighter to grab CON save. Take 14DEX to have 19 AC (Breastplate + Shield + Defense fighting style). With Shield spell that's 24 AC, pretty good for a wizard.

Every time you cast Shield or Absorb Elements or Counterspell or any abjuration spell, you get extra double the spell level as hp for your ward. It shall take many turns for enemies to even go past the ward. After Wizard 5, take the second Fighter for Action Surge and amazing combos.

[maxwell_wolfen]

Wizards dealing damage? No, they won't deal as much as a Sorlock, especially because they do damage spending little to no resource. But wizards shouldn't worry about that. They should worry about being unkillable annoying pests who can destroy any scheme through clever tactics.

I'm assuming you're open to multiclass when going Wizard. Here's the best I have.

- The Immortal Military Wizard
Fighter 2/Abjurer X
Start Fighter to grab CON save. Take 14DEX to have 19 AC (Breastplate + Shield + Defense fighting style). With Shield spell that's 24 AC, pretty good for a wizard.

Every time you cast Shield or Absorb Elements or Counterspell or any abjuration spell, you get extra double the spell level as hp for your ward. It shall take many turns for enemies to even go past the ward. After Wizard 5, take the second Fighter for Action Surge and amazing combos.

i had in mind something similiar without fighter levels.
abjurer all the way to 13th level (we are currently at 13 lvl) standard array and variant human. i have 2 ABI's and two feats till 13 lvl. end stats at 13 lvl are
STR 8
DEX 16
CON 14
INT 20
WIS 12
CHA 10
and 2 feats for 2 resilient DEX and CON meaning i am proficient at DEX, CON, INT, WIS saves...plus i am an abjurer with wards and etc

ok armor class is mage armor (lasts for 8 hours) so i cast it a lot before.. 13+dex is 16 AC and +5 with shield =21 AC...not bad

i was thinking of adding one level of cleric so that i can have medium armor prof. but yeah...being behind spell progression hurts a little but i can achieve 15+2(dex) +2 shield = 19 ac + 5 (SHield) = 24 ac plus domain from cleric

[Specter]

i had in mind something similiar without fighter levels.
abjurer all the way to 13th level (we are currently at 13 lvl) standard array and variant human. i have 2 ABI's and two feats till 13 lvl. end stats at 13 lvl are
STR 8
DEX 16
CON 14
INT 20
WIS 12
CHA 10
and 2 feats for 2 resilient DEX and CON meaning i am proficient at DEX, CON, INT, WIS saves...plus i am an abjurer with wards and etc

ok armor class is mage armor (lasts for 8 hours) so i cast it a lot before.. 13+dex is 16 AC and +5 with shield =21 AC...not bad

i was thinking of adding one level of cleric so that i can have medium armor prof. but yeah...being behind spell progression hurts a little but i can achieve 15+2(dex) +2 shield = 19 ac + 5 (SHield) = 24 ac plus domain from cleric

By RAW, you can't take Resilient twice. Not to worry, you have Absorb Elements to cut damage in half even if you fail the save. Alert or Tough may be better for a wizard.

I'd also trade CON and DEX. More hp and the save for concentration outweigh DEX benefits imo.

And a fighter level down the road would really help you. Cleric is good for giving you Bless and Medium armor, but it doesn't get you Defense or second wind. A tough choice.

[djreynolds]

we have a paladin, a barbarian, a cleric, and a monk
i think we have enough frontal power. my sorcerer is good though. sniping targets with his eldrich blast and so on. but i miss those neat spells the wizard has such as wall of force...contigency.. and i reaally love abjurers for their abilities. We will also surely reach 20 lvl so we will use 9lvl spells.

Wizards have one thing a sorcerer doesn't have... an entire spell book. My favorite thing to do was hassle the DM about buying scrolls. I might have had at least 1/4th of them by 13th level. I just wanted to collect them all.

I know the cleric has lots of good utility spells, but you can to.

I played a mountain dwarf abjurer, awesome. Especially if you are going 20th level, spell mastery and signature spell are worth it. Max out intelligence, grab resilient con and then max it. If you have anything left over I would suggest lucky, it sucks failing saves. War caster is sweet, but why are you in melee.

I know its crazy, but always have feather fall prepared, I took 30 HP on a fall and almost died. And misty step and gaseous form work also for strength stuff and grapples.

Wizard is my favorite class, if you do not take resilient wisdom... take resilient charisma... banishment sucks and some DCs are so high if you dumped charisma even a natural 20 will not work on some saves.

Enjoy

[Dalebert]

Wizards can be fun and versatile and have amazing utility. They're more likely to have just the right spell prepared for the occasion. They will never be particularly competitive on damage. Don't build one for that.

Take a look at my signature. Action economy is king in D&D. It's not just the king of optimization and effective. It's also the king of fun and that's what it's all about. Getting to do more stuff when your turn comes around just makes the game more fun. I have a friend who's an optimization master who's obsessed with make sure not a single bonus action or reaction goes by unused.

I coincidentally just played my sorlock last night ( S10 / W3). He just got Qucken and OMG. I can quicken a telekinesis and then restrain something before firebolting it with advantage, usually twinned so I get to firebolt something else also, adding my charisma bonus to the dmg of coursse. Now I've gotten to contribute to damage but I've also done some crowd control while enhancing my teammates' abilities to do damage to it. I can open with a quickened fireball and then finish off two things with a twinned firebolt. I have a Staff of Swarming Insects so I can use my action to active the heavy obscurement that only I can see through and then quicken a spell, taking advantage of enemies within 30 ft being blinded--defense and offense, with the offense being enhanced.

Massive sorcery points for fun stuff:
I rarely take dmg so I rarely need the benefits of a long rest. Thus, when everyone else is long resting, I'm mediating which counts as a short rest and then taking 4 more short rests, creating extra spell slots for the day ahead. That works out to 20 sorcery points so I typically make two 5th level slots and three 2nd level slots. The latter are mainly for turning to sorcery points for shenanigans. Any time the party takes a short rest, that's 4 more sorcery points. I have the sorcerer capstone already essentially thanks to the warlock dip.

Technically, I could keep doing this every night as long as I don't take a long rest. That's when created slots go poof. But I don't do that because I'm trying not to pee off my DMs. It's plenty good just assuming the last the day and that's it.

[djreynolds]

Wizards can be fun and versatile and have amazing utility. They're more likely to have just the right spell prepared for the occasion. They will never be particularly competitive on damage. Don't build one for that.

.

Very true on the damage, sorcerer is better. And I like your build, a nasty Sorlock for sure.

But counterspelling everything with your signature counterspell with proficiency added to your intelligence checks really angers your DM.

[Toadkiller]

Wizards can do amazing damage. In one fight last night our ranger was restrained by a monster, and this at disadvantage. I restrained the monster in return with black tentacles negating the disadvantage for the ranger. The hits he made that would have missed were my damage. Likewise the barbarian now had advantage to hit so I get a share of those hits too. It went from holy hell the ranger is gonna die to laughing about how easy it was.

Of course our sorceror-warlock tosses out "slow" and such at key moments but I have more control options. It's all what you want to play.

[maxwell_wolfen]

Wizards can do amazing damage. In one fight last night our ranger was restrained by a monster, and this at disadvantage. I restrained the monster in return with black tentacles negating the disadvantage for the ranger. The hits he made that would have missed were my damage. Likewise the barbarian now had advantage to hit so I get a share of those hits too. It went from holy hell the ranger is gonna die to laughing about how easy it was.

Of course our sorceror-warlock tosses out "slow" and such at key moments but I have more control options. It's all what you want to play.

I have a sorlock build and i know about doing damage. Yeap quicken is neat and action economy is king. But do t forget wizard spells like contigency and simulacrum too. Those break action economy too. I think in one vs one the abjurer wizard wins due to versatiliy and better dispel or counterspell.

[maxwell_wolfen]

Also ypu can consider arcane theurge from unearthed arcana as a wizard to boost your dc +2... pretty neat too

[Dalebert]

The hits he made that would have missed were my damage. Likewise the barbarian now had advantage to hit so I get a share of those hits too. It went from holy hell the ranger is gonna die to laughing about how easy it was.

This is a good point that many overlook. When you buff someone or control monsters, basically any effect that enhances everyone else, you deserve credit for the extra potential you've created.

In terms of using this as an argument that wizards do great damage, that logic is a little thin. You're failing to consider that a sorcerer can do that too though perhaps in other ways. Just recently in my example I pointed out how my sorcerer can impose the restrained condition with telekinesis as a bonus action AND twin a firebolt which does an average of about 23 dmg to two targets. That restrained condition imposes disadvantage on the monster while granting advantage to everyone attacking it, PLUS I got to attack two monsters on my turn. The telekinesis stays up for 10 minutes and I can keep doing that with my action while quickening full spells like fireball or Ice Knife. My sorlock can Phantasmal Force two monsters, and if they're big dumb ones like beasts or ogres, it's incredibly effective and also cheap (two 2nd level slots which I get back on a short rest). He can polymorph two mobs. He can cast spells against another cast with subtle so the other caster can't counterspell him. He can use his action to control his permanent illusion of a Shield Guardian to distract an enemy while still casting a full spell with Quciken. The list goes on and on. Their spell list is simple but MM opens up SO much, partciularly in the area of action economy which is crucial.

I just want to point out that I freakin' love LOVE LOVE my illusionist wizard. He's a trickster of epic proportions and has become one of my top favorite characters. He has pet permanent illusions that he can transform with an action into any illusion he wants. He casts Creation and turn it into any object he wants all day long. He casts Seeming and can control what the entire party looks like all day long, including his four skeletal archers who can wander around town looking like human body guards. He's freakin' awesome and has resource-management down pat. He does amazing magical things all day long seemingly effortlessly. But he doesn't compare to my sorcerer on action economy or DPS on any day of the week.

[maxwell_wolfen]

This is a good point that many overlook. When you buff someone or control monsters, basically any effect that enhances everyone else, you deserve credit for the extra potential you've created.

In terms of using this as an argument that wizards do great damage, that logic is a little thin. You're failing to consider that a sorcerer can do that too though perhaps in other ways. Just recently in my example I pointed out how my sorcerer can impose the restrained condition with telekinesis as a bonus action AND twin a firebolt which does an average of about 23 dmg to two targets. That restrained condition imposes disadvantage on the monster while granting advantage to everyone attacking it, PLUS I got to attack two monsters on my turn. The telekinesis stays up for 10 minutes and I can keep doing that with my action while quickening full spells like fireball or Ice Knife. My sorlock can Phantasmal Force two monsters, and if they're big dumb ones like beasts or ogres, it's incredibly effective and also cheap (two 2nd level slots which I get back on a short rest). He can polymorph two mobs. He can cast spells against another cast with subtle so the other caster can't counterspell him. He can use his action to control his permanent illusion of a Shield Guardian to distract an enemy while still casting a full spell with Quciken. The list goes on and on. Their spell list is simple but MM opens up SO much, partciularly in the area of action economy which is crucial.

I just want to point out that I freakin' love LOVE LOVE my illusionist wizard. He's a trickster of epic proportions and has become one of my top favorite characters. He has pet permanent illusions that he can transform with an action into any illusion he wants. He casts Creation and turn it into any object he wants all day long. He casts Seeming and can control what the entire party looks like all day long, including his four skeletal archers who can wander around town looking like human body guards. He's freakin' awesome and has resource-management down pat. He does amazing magical things all day long seemingly effortlessly. But he doesn't compare to my sorcerer on action economy or DPS on any day of the week.


that thing with damage...ok i understand that twining firebolts or EB's is fun and in the latter case devastating single target damage. but in other terms i cant understand how much better it is from a pure wizard. twining hex or hold person? ok you have it for 2 people. the same can be done if cast at higher level. action economy? contigency. Meanwhile a sorcerer can quicken a cantrip...thats some damage , nothing too OP. An evoker can maximize a 5th level spell...blight for 8d8 damage =64, a cone of cold.. a fireball... An abjurer is king of dispell and counterspell, and has spell damage resistance. Thats better IMO.
What really pains me if i choose to play a wizard from sorcerer is the damn heightened spell. those advantages on saving throws make a whole differerence in every situation..even in boss fights.

[Rhedyn]

A level 13 sorcerer or level 13 warlock would probably do better.

A level 13 wizard can cast simulacrum on a party member and do tremendous more DPR than the sorlock. With cantrips and one spell they could have casted weeks ago, your "hax" quicken eldritch blast is irrelevant.

Multi class combos are vastly overestimated. Sure they don't cripple you, but a pure class is almost always better.

[Dalebert]

Multi class combos are vastly overestimated. Sure they don't cripple you, but a pure class is almost always better.

Depends, but in this case I can definitely see that. I sacrificed some optimization for a more versatile character who has a lot of spell slots and sorcery points to play around with. His burst potential won't rival a str8 sorcerer of the same level.

As for simulacrum, yes that's a broken spell but that's not until level 13 and sorcerers won't get it until 17 so you have four levels of having a broken spell while sorcerers don't. Wizards also get True Polymorph eventually. There are some really great spells at those higher levels and I can see some sorcerers having buyer's remorse around then, but there's a huge chunk of a character's career that happen before that point. Not many games tend to involve those levels of play.

[Specter]

A level 13 sorcerer or level 13 warlock would probably do better.

A level 13 wizard can cast simulacrum on a party member and do tremendous more DPR than the sorlock. With cantrips and one spell they could have casted weeks ago, your "hax" quicken eldritch blast is irrelevant.

Multi class combos are vastly overestimated. Sure they don't cripple you, but a pure class is almost always better.

Well, that depends on what you want. If you want 4 points of AC (as I do), no reason not to take a level of Fighter/Cleric.

[maxwell_wolfen]

it seems one level of cleric is mandatory for medium armor, so i will add one level dip in my abjurer. in the end i will only lose signature spel.
how one level of fighter is good? heavy armor requires 15+ strength or so.
knowledge domain for double prof in arcana or life are the way to go.

also delabert i think simulacrum is not on the sorcerer list...so only wizards get it

[rooneg]

it seems one level of cleric is mandatory for medium armor, so i will add one level dip in my abjurer. in the end i will only lose signature spel.
how one level of fighter is good? heavy armor requires 15+ strength or so.
knowledge domain for double prof in arcana or life are the way to go.

also delabert i think simulacrum is not on the sorcerer list...so only wizards get it

You can use heavy armor even without 15 STR if you're ok with the movement penalty. I'm not ok with that, but some people are. If you have 14 DEX medium armor is perfectly fine anyway, 18 AC (Scale + DEX + Shield) at level 1 seems fine to me.

A single level of fighter (if it's 1st level) gives you armor+shield prof, CON save prof and the defense fighting style. It's good, but I prefer cleric since you don't fall behind in caster levels. Those spell slots are nice, even if you're one level behind in actually learning spells of the higher level.

[EvilAnagram]

If we're talking a pure mage duel, then a straight sorcerer wins by virtue of having more spell slots through which to cast Counterspell thanks to sorcery points.

Unless the wizard is an abjurer, in which case he's going to be better at Counterspell in general and save his higher level spell slots for killing.

[maxwell_wolfen]

You can use heavy armor even without 15 STR if you're ok with the movement penalty. I'm not ok with that, but some people are. If you have 14 DEX medium armor is perfectly fine anyway, 18 AC (Scale + DEX + Shield) at level 1 seems fine to me.

A single level of fighter (if it's 1st level) gives you armor+shield prof, CON save prof and the defense fighting style. It's good, but I prefer cleric since you don't fall behind in caster levels. Those spell slots are nice, even if you're one level behind in actually learning spells of the higher level.

19 ac if i wear a half plate. but with a disadvantage of stealth.
+1 ac but -10 movement is a bit odd with heavy armor. maybe i ll stick with medium

con saves are mandatory thats why i took variant human and resilient CON for my feat. i have a second feat (or a third ABI) until 13 lvl so i plan to take resilient dex for dex saves (dm is ok about taking resilient both times for another attribute)
so i ll add 1 cleric level. and personally i find knowledge very useful.
i think there is one domain in UA that adds +1 magic AC in armor (forge domain) but again i m not that interested,
any other ideas?


if i could i would have chosen deep gnome instead of human, but those two resilient feats are so useful..

[maxwell_wolfen]

If we're talking a pure mage duel, then a straight sorcerer wins by virtue of having more spell slots through which to cast Counterspell thanks to sorcery points.

Unless the wizard is an abjurer, in which case he's going to be better at Counterspell in general and save his higher level spell slots for killing.


wizard has also better selection of spells. if we take account of 9lvl spells..i just cast prismatic wall on myself and laugh at the sorcerers face

[EvilAnagram]

19 ac if i wear a half plate. but with a disadvantage of stealth.
+1 ac but -10 movement is a bit odd with heavy armor. maybe i ll stick with medium

con saves are mandatory thats why i took variant human and resilient CON for my feat. i have a second feat (or a third ABI) until 13 lvl so i plan to take resilient dex for dex saves (dm is ok about taking resilient both times for another attribute)
so i ll add 1 cleric level. and personally i find knowledge very useful.
i think there is one domain in UA that adds +1 magic AC in armor (forge domain) but again i m not that interested,
any other ideas?


if i could i would have chosen deep gnome instead of human, but those two resilient feats are so useful..

Half-plate, Medium Armor Master, and a shield get you 20 AC when you get your first big score at level 4.

[maxwell_wolfen]

Half-plate, Medium Armor Master, and a shield get you 20 AC when you get your first big score at level 4.

yeap thats a great feat but i ll lose to resilient dex so i wont be proficient in dex saves. i may take it as a later feat though.

[rooneg]

Half-plate, Medium Armor Master, and a shield get you 20 AC when you get your first big score at level 4.

Only if you start with a DEX of 16. That seems awfully high for a caster who's willing to use their level 4 ASI as a feat. You could also get it with defense fighting style if you're a fighter I guess, but that doesn't use Medium Armor Master.

[Rhedyn]

Depends, but in this case I can definitely see that. I sacrificed some optimization for a more versatile character who has a lot of spell slots and sorcery points to play around with. His burst potential won't rival a str8 sorcerer of the same level.

As for simulacrum, yes that's a broken spell but that's not until level 13 and sorcerers won't get it until 17 so you have four levels of having a broken spell while sorcerers don't. Wizards also get True Polymorph eventually. There are some really great spells at those higher levels and I can see some sorcerers having buyer's remorse around then, but there's a huge chunk of a character's career that happen before that point. Not many games tend to involve those levels of play.
Sorry Sorcs don't get simulacrum

But a pure sorc would have access to a 7th level Heighten Banishment

[EvilAnagram]

wizard has also better selection of spells. if we take account of 9lvl spells..i just cast prismatic wall on myself and laugh at the sorcerers face

Cool. Counterspell, 9th level slot.

Even if the wizard counter-Counterspells, he fails 65% of the time (unless he's an abjurer). So, there's a 65% chance that the Wizard just wasted his 9th level slot and his reaction, so the Sorcerer can cast Power Word Stun with no fear of a Counterspell, then a Quickened Shocking Grasp with insta-crit. And then there's a very high chance the Wizard fails his save next turn and the Sorcerer can make more attacks with no recourse. In fact, the best thing a wizard can do in that situation (statistically) is not counter the Counterspell and bide his time.

Counterspell is what rules magical duels. Sorcerers can get more use out of it because it doesn't hurt as much when you spend a high level slot to cast it. You can always just make more mid slots as a bonus action, and you can Quicken spells when you get countered. Bards and abjurers get even more use out of Counterspell because they get to add proficiency/half proficiency to their Counterspell checks, meaning they don't have to save their own high level slots for Counterspell.

Saying Wizard has X spell and this class can only Y spell doesn't matter. Counterspell rules the mage duels, and that makes the mage duel ranking simple:


Wizard (Abjurer)
Bard (Lore)
Bard (Valor)
Sorcerer
Wizard (others)
Everyone who can't Counterspell.

[SharkForce]

how does the sorcerer know to use a level 9 counterspell?

(also, frankly, once you get up to that point, globe of invulnerability is what wins spellcaster duels, so long as you can get far enough away to be impossible to counterspell in the first place).

[Dalebert]

also delabert i think simulacrum is not on the sorcerer list...so only wizards get it

Sorcerers get every 8th level and lower spell from every class once they get Wish, and without the 1000gp cost or the need to have a piece of the creature. So do wizards of course.


If we're talking a pure mage duel, then a straight sorcerer wins by virtue of having more spell slots through which to cast Counterspell thanks to sorcery points.

Are we talking straight mage duels? I didn't think we were. I thought we were talking about what sorcerers are good for and what wizards are good for as part of an adventuring party and I thought we were conccluding they're both good but different. I have a few of both and I like them all.


Unless the wizard is an abjurer, in which case he's going to be better at Counterspell in general and save his higher level spell slots for killing.

Unless the sorcerer has subtle spell in which case even the abjurer's Counterspells are worthless, but the sorcerer can still at least try to counterspell the wizard.

Generally speaking, I'd say wizards do better if they have an idea of things that are coming and can prepare while sorcerers are better adapting off-the-cuff.

[EvilAnagram]

how does the sorcerer know to use a level 9 counterspell?

(also, frankly, once you get up to that point, globe of invulnerability is what wins spellcaster duels, so long as you can get far enough away to be impossible to counterspell in the first place).
You'd have to make house rules to keep people from knowing who is casting what because you have to say what you're casting.

If you institute the "roll Arcana to know what they're casting" rule that some tables use (that needs a better name, maybe Arcana-counter?), it would definitely give wizards the edge, especially combined with their specialty spells.

Globe of Invulnerability is a pretty solid "I win" button, though.

[Dalebert]

I feel spells happen too fast to be identified as they're being cast. Each spell is also unique to the caster making it even more absurd to identify it in the couple of seconds you have to decide whether to respond with a reaction. If I know there's a counterspeller in the group, I'll typically say "He's casting a spell" and then pause while looking right at the counterspeller. That's it. Decide. Then I say what happens.

That's my thought on it. It's fine if you want to be more lenient. If you do allow it, I think the DC should be rather high, possibly higher in identifying a charisma-caster's spell. Their spells are even more unique and are less likely to have common magical-sciency sounding words in them. A bard will sing something personal to him. A sorcerer will do whatever fits the flavor of his magic. A warlock will call on his patron for power, possibly in Abyssal or Sylvan or gobbledy-**** tentacle-tongue.

[EvilAnagram]

I feel spells happen too fast to be identified as they're being cast. Each spell is also unique to the caster making it even more absurd to identify it in the couple of seconds you have to decide whether to respond with a reaction. If I know there's a counterspeller in the group, I'll typically say "He's casting a spell" and then pause while looking right at the counterspeller. That's it. Decide. Then I say what happens.

I was assuming PvP. You know, with both players having to say I cast x at the table. I don't actually have any counterspellers in the group I DM, and I still only ever describe the effects of the spells NPCs cast. It's just the best approach to narrative DMing as far as I'm concerned.

At the same time, if a caster is waving a rod in the air making a specific glyph, I think you might recognize that spell. I mean, if a major league batter can see the difference in spin between a fastball and a slider (as many attest they can), then I think one of the best casters in the world can recognize somatic components.

I think the best way to handle a wizard duel with PCs is to use note cards passed between the PC and the DM, but this is totally a house rule.

[Dalebert]

I picture somatic components (typically) as being very simple, e.g. pointing your hand to direct the magic. You can do them while restrained, after all. I suppose they could be tracing a glyph but that's most likely a wizard and not a sorcerer or bard. The sorcerer could just be shouting some insults to channel his rage or saying a little rhyme that helps him remember that feeling he had the first time he became lighter than air and was able to fly. He's just got magic powers, basically, with the limitation that he has to speak and/or direct the magic with his hands and so on. Most sorcerers are kinda (book) dumb and likely don't even have the arcana skill, much less know a glyph that's associated with fire or whatever.

[EvilAnagram]

I honestly never make a Sorcerer without the Arcana skill. It seems like madness to me

[Dalebert]

I honestly never make a Sorcerer without the Arcana skill. It seems like madness to me

I could see a sorcerer deciding to study arcana purely for academic reasons but why would they necessarily know anything about arcana? They're not making magic happen with their smartz. As a general rule, I tend to want skills associated with the abilities that are high so I can do those things very well instead of just mediocre, as most sorcerers with arcana will be since Int is a dump stat for them.

[djreynolds]

Help me out here.

If the spell is 4th level or higher, you roll a spell check with a DC of 10 + the spells level. DC19 being the top end for a 20th level PC barring any magic items like a wand of magic focus/ wand of the war mage

So a spell check is not an arcana check, and a spell check is basically an intelligence check, so I'm assuming +5 or more.

And an abjurer would also add his proficiency bonus to the spell check at 10th, so +11 on his roll

And with spell mastery he can use counterspell as much as he wants

My question is this, a wizard uses his reaction to counterspell. How does he know what level of the spell is? An Arcana check right, but is this also part of the reaction.

1st the spell is cast
2nd roll an arcana check to determine what level the spell
3rd roll a spell check to defeat it.

[EvilAnagram]

I treat knowledge checks as instantaneous because that's how knowledge appears in your head.

A casts spell
B rolls Arcana
B decides to counter (or not)
B casts Counterspell at whichever level desired
Counterspell resolves
A's spell resolves (or doesn't, if countered)


I could see a sorcerer deciding to study arcana purely for academic reasons but why would they necessarily know anything about arcana? They're not making magic happen with their smartz. As a general rule, I tend to want skills associated with the abilities that are high so I can do those things very well instead of just mediocre, as most sorcerers with arcana will be since Int is a dump stat for them.

A good plumber knows quite a bit about simple machines, water pressure, and certain metals. He may not know as much as an engineer, but he has worked with them all his life and understands the mechanics of them without ever understanding the math.

[maxwell_wolfen]

Help me out here.

If the spell is 4th level or higher, you roll a spell check with a DC of 10 + the spells level. DC19 being the top end for a 20th level PC barring any magic items like a wand of magic focus/ wand of the war mage

So a spell check is not an arcana check, and a spell check is basically an intelligence check, so I'm assuming +5 or more.

And an abjurer would also add his proficiency bonus to the spell check at 10th, so +11 on his roll

And with spell mastery he can use counterspell as much as he wants

My question is this, a wizard uses his reaction to counterspell. How does he know what level of the spell is? An Arcana check right, but is this also part of the reaction.

1st the spell is cast
2nd roll an arcana check to determine what level the spell
3rd roll a spell check to defeat it.

counterspell is a 3rd level spell so it is not elligible for spell mastery


the arcana check is being made instantly, it doesnt need reactions or bonus actions

[Dalebert]

counterspell is a 3rd level spell so it is not elligible for spell mastery

I'm sure he meant Signature Spell.



the arcana check is being made instantly, it doesnt need reactions or bonus actions

By default, making a skill check requires an action. There are exceptions like a rogue's Cunning Action. If a DM does decide to allow an arcana check for identifying a spell as it's being cast, that's venturing into house rule territory and even then, using their passive arcana score makes the most sense. It still seems extremely generous to the counterspeller to allow someone to just hear a portion of the casting (since they have to interrupt before it's finished) that's in the realm of 1 to 3 seconds long and identify the spell.

[Rhedyn]

By default, making a skill check requires an action.This is completely false. This is not a default rule.

Now as for the whole, "Can I do something like 3.5 spellcraft?". There is no rules. We can assume it is either automatic or impossible. A DM could allow you to role an ability check to determine an effect because skills do whatever the DM allows them to do.

[maxwell_wolfen]

I treat knowledge checks as instantaneous because that's how knowledge appears in your head.

A casts spell
B rolls Arcana
B decides to counter (or not)
B casts Counterspell at whichever level desired
Counterspell resolves
A's spell resolves (or doesn't, if countered)



A good plumber knows quite a bit about simple machines, water pressure, and certain metals. He may not know as much as an engineer, but he has worked with them all his life and understands the mechanics of them without ever understanding the math.


evilanagram! i have read all your handbooks! please help me optimize a human variant abjurer. we start at 13 lvl and only standard array 15.14.13.12.10.8

i was thinking a deep gnome too but i lose the resilient feats...

[Dalebert]

This is completely false. This is not a default rule.

From the first paragraph of "Ability Checks" on p.174 of the PHB. (emphasis mine)

"The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that
has a chance of failure."

[EvilAnagram]

evilanagram! i have read all your handbooks! please help me optimize a human variant abjurer. we start at 13 lvl and only standard array 15.14.13.12.10.8

i was thinking a deep gnome too but i lose the resilient feats...

It's kind of frowned upon to derail a thread to focus on your preferred topic. It would be a much better idea to make a separate thread for advice on your build and get input from multiple people, plenty of whom go much further down the rabbit whole than I.

I'd be happy to help out there or even in PM, but this thread already has a topic.

[EvilAnagram]

From the first paragraph of "Ability Checks" on p.174 of the PHB. (emphasis mine)

"The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that
has a chance of failure."

That is not necessarily referring to the use of an action in initiative.

[maxwell_wolfen]

It's kind of frowned upon to derail a thread to focus on your preferred topic. It would be a much better idea to make a separate thread for advice on your build and get input from multiple people, plenty of whom go much further down the rabbit whole than I.

I'd be happy to help out there or even in PM, but this thread already has a topic.

i ll open a new thread right away

[Dalebert]

That is not necessarily referring to the use of an action in initiative.

Initiative? That seems off-topic. Anyway, I'm aware of exceptions. I simply said it's the default and it is. Of course DMs can make exceptions but generally when a PC says they want to do something, if you're in combat, that takes an action. Passives are encouraged to be used in cases when a PC isn't actively doing something the primary example being if someone is hiding and you want do know whether someone notices them. Similarly, if someone starts casting and you want to see if someone recognizes the spell, it seems like a passive check. Following that reasoning, IF you decide to allow someone to identify a spell on the spot, in the span of maybe a couple seconds, without even hearing the entire spell, when every spell is unique to that caster, and without even using a reaction, the typical way would be passive arcana against a probably high DC. I don't allow it but if you do, I'd suggest a DC of 15 + spell level.

You just can't sit there and ponder for a moment which would be represented by a roll to see if you roll high.
"That word in the middle sounded familiar, something about a call to the elemental lords of the sky and clouds. Hmm... Where did I hear that?"
*KABLAM!*
"Ouch! Oh, yeah! That's right. It was in lightning-safety class when our teacher demonstrated a lightning bolt ."

[TheUser]

Cool. Counterspell, 9th level slot.

Even if the wizard counter-Counterspells, he fails 65% of the time (unless he's an abjurer). So, there's a 65% chance that the Wizard just wasted his 9th level slot and his reaction, so the Sorcerer can cast Power Word Stun with no fear of a Counterspell, then a Quickened Shocking Grasp with insta-crit. And then there's a very high chance the Wizard fails his save next turn and the Sorcerer can make more attacks with no recourse. In fact, the best thing a wizard can do in that situation (statistically) is not counter the Counterspell and bide his time.

Counterspell is what rules magical duels. Sorcerers can get more use out of it because it doesn't hurt as much when you spend a high level slot to cast it. You can always just make more mid slots as a bonus action, and you can Quicken spells when you get countered. Bards and abjurers get even more use out of Counterspell because they get to add proficiency/half proficiency to their Counterspell checks, meaning they don't have to save their own high level slots for Counterspell.

Saying Wizard has X spell and this class can only Y spell doesn't matter. Counterspell rules the mage duels, and that makes the mage duel ranking simple:


Wizard (Abjurer)
Bard (Lore)
Bard (Valor)
Sorcerer
Wizard (others)
Everyone who can't Counterspell.


Sorcerer is at the top of the counter spell list.
Subtle spell makes counterspelling the sorcerer impossible.
It also means they can counterspell another caster without them knowing it was the sorcerer who did it.
It doesn't matter if an abjurer gets to add their proficiency bonus to counterspells if they never get to use it against a sorcerer, moreover there's nothing stopping an abjurer from having their counterspell countered.

[coredump]

But a pure sorc would have access to a 7th level Heighten Banishment
Just thinking about that gives me chills.....



The 'power' of a Wizard is not dealing damage..... he has 'people' for that.....

The Wizard is there because he has over a dozen utility spells he can cast as a ritual, a ton of prepared spells, a huge spell list to choose from..... and can use these options to control the battlefield and change the course of the adventure.

[maxwell_wolfen]

Just thinking about that gives me chills.....



The 'power' of a Wizard is not dealing damage..... he has 'people' for that.....

The Wizard is there because he has over a dozen utility spells he can cast as a ritual, a ton of prepared spells, a huge spell list to choose from..... and can use these options to control the battlefield and change the course of the adventure.


i couldnt agree more. though in terms of damage there is hardly any difference between a wizard or sorcerer. technically they have the same action economy...(dont bash me with quicken) and the same damaging spells. The eldrich blast cheese is sth else..