Is Wizard the weakest Tier 1 class?

[Endarire]

Greetings, all!

Having loved Wizards since Baldur's Gate in the 90s (which was AD&D 2E), and having read plenty of guides and participated in forum posts and arguments and played many Wizards, I now wonder if they are the weakest tier 1 class.

I'm not saying Wizards are weak unless they're just ill-suited to the campaign. I'm just wondering if Clerics and Druids (and other tier 1 classes like Archivists and Artificers) just do the "BUCCS" roles that Wizard does best (buffing, utility, crowd control, summons) comparably or better while still sometimes healing and crafting at least as well as a Wizard. Admittedly, Wizards are the traditional Knowledge junkies, but Archivists (and anyone with the skill points and class skills) can be too.

When is a Wizard traditionally most useful? When he spends a spell slot. What happens when he isn't spending a spell slot? Talking, waiting, or/and wishing he were useful. Clerics and Druids can do the physical fighting thing well without spending spell slots or spending a comparable number of spell slots to the Wizard.

And, yes, I also recognize D&D 3.5 is traditionally a team game and opinions may vary. So there.

What say you?

[Inevitability]

What do you base the assumption on that clerics and druids are 'better' at buffing, utility, crowd control and summons?

[Sleven]

Arcane spells are inherently more powerful than divine. Wish vs Miracle is the perfect example of this. Furthermore, the arcane spell list has more of the broken spells on one list than any other individual list. Clerics and Druids have to go out of their way to get goodies like Polymorph Any Object and Planar Binding. Arcane spells can act as a stand-in for any given action any other character class is able to take, and in most cases do it better.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

I'd say Druids are absolutely the best Tier 1, especially with regards to buffing, utility (involving their specialty), crowd controls, and summons, but that's just one class.

Archivist can almost do everything Wizard can do, but they can't take Uncanny Forethought, Spontaneous Divination, etc. that makes the Wizard king of utility.

Cleric isn't as good as Wizard at BUCCS, though they do offer a lot of utility that Wizard doesn't. I'd say Cleric is the least flexible Tier 1, considering they often have to be specifically built to fill any given role via domain choices. Neither class is necessarily better than the other, they're just different.

I've never played or played with an Artificer, so I'm not the best person to judge their capabilities. They may be better at some things, but if they're less flexible on the fly as with Archivist, then they're not necessarily better than Wizard.

[Silva Stormrage]

I'd say Druids are absolutely the best Tier 1, especially with regards to buffing, utility (involving their specialty), crowd controls, and summons, but that's just one class.

Archivist can almost do everything Wizard can do, but they can't take Uncanny Forethought, Spontaneous Divination, etc. that makes the Wizard king of utility.

Cleric isn't as good as Wizard at BUCCS, though they do offer a lot of utility that Wizard doesn't. I'd say Cleric is the least flexible Tier 1, considering they often have to be specifically built to fill any given role via domain choices. Neither class is necessarily better than the other, they're just different.

I've never played or played with an Artificer, so I'm not the best person to judge their capabilities. They may be better at some things, but if they're less flexible on the fly as with Archivist, then they're not necessarily better than Wizard.


Artificers are weird in an actual campaign. If they are given enough prep time they can be better than every tier 1 in every single field. The problem being that you rarely have enough prep time for that and you often don't have enough resources either (DM's usually limit infinite craft XP tricks and also money generation tricks). So where an artificer lands on the power scale depends heavily on the campaign and DM. Still unless the DM is utterly brutal in this regard (No loot or almost no downtime) they are still tier 1 pretty handedly they just need to prepare well.

[Pugwampy]

Tier 1 concept is relative to the level .

Level 1 wizard is weakest pathetic everything .

[Nifft]

Is it viable for a Human Wizard 1 to take Precocious Apprentice + Fiery Burst and have at-will 2d6 fire bursts all day?

If so, I think it's probably not the weakest T1.

[Endarire]

I agree that individual Wizard spells can be (and often are) more powerful/versatile/effective than individual divine spells and that Wizards normally get more of these 'wish I had these' spells than other tier 1 casters, but I also agree that the Druid gets a lot of good things in one class package. Cleric and Druid have their ways of accessing ('raiding') the Wizard spell list, such as Contempative for the Spell Domain.

[emeraldstreak]

Level 1 wizard is weakest pathetic everything .

LOL


Is it viable for a Human Wizard 1 to take Precocious Apprentice + Fiery Burst and have at-will 2d6 fire bursts all day?


That's an option for extended gauntlets.

[Sagetim]

I agree that individual Wizard spells can be (and often are) more powerful/versatile/effective than individual divine spells and that Wizards normally get more of these 'wish I had these' spells than other tier 1 casters, but I also agree that the Druid gets a lot of good things in one class package. Cleric and Druid have their ways of accessing ('raiding') the Wizard spell list, such as Contempative for the Spell Domain.

Aren't they limited to just the one domain spell per day though? So, for example, only one Anyspell and one Greater Anyspell, as opposed to actually being able to prepare said spell multiple times per day?

I think Wizard has the best spell list, even if they don't have raising from the dead or any good healing spells, they have plenty of ways to avoid damage. And so many splatbooks in 3.5 just threw more candy at wizards, which, because they are wizards, they could learn and prepare when they wanted to use it. Meanwhile, clerics and other T1's got much less support in splatbooks, and at least some of that support for clerics came in the form of domain only spells, further lessening how many spells they had to choose from.

Oh, and also if I remember correctly, Greater Anyspell is limited to what, 7th level spells and lower? 6th maybe? Which still leaves at least the multitude of 8th and 9th level spells on the wizard list out of the hands of even Contemplatives and their Spell Domain access.

[Inevitability]

Tier 1 concept is relative to the level .

Level 1 wizard is weakest pathetic everything .

Grease, Hypnotism, Color Spray, Abrupt Jaunt, Summon Monster I...

So pathetic.

[Gnaeus]

Yeah, the core wizard can likely memorize grease, color spray and sleep at L1. He's probably going to completely shut down 1-2 encounters. He has one of the highest set of skills in the game due to high int. He has a familiar, for scouting, or action economy (like a raccoon or monkey with a CLW potion) or a feat equivalent like +2 fort. Some utility cantrips like detect magic. Give him a single encounter under his belt and he can scribe a dozen L1 scrolls at 12.5 gp each, or help the cleric make CLW scrolls. He has more utility than probably any other character in the party. He can likely trivialize 1-2 encounters, before the scroll machine comes on line. And that's a PHB wizard without abrupt jaunt or any other more advanced cheese. I'd almost always rather have another wiz in party than a fighter, even at L1

[Eldariel]

Yeah, the core wizard can likely memorize grease, color spray and sleep at L1. He's probably going to completely shut down 1-2 encounters. He has one of the highest set of skills in the game due to high int. He has a familiar, for scouting, or action economy (like a raccoon or monkey with a CLW potion) or a feat equivalent like +2 fort. Some utility cantrips like detect magic. Give him a single encounter under his belt and he can scribe a dozen L1 scrolls at 12.5 gp each, or help the cleric make CLW scrolls. He has more utility than probably any other character in the party. He can likely trivialize 1-2 encounters, before the scroll machine comes on line. And that's a PHB wizard without abrupt jaunt or any other more advanced cheese. I'd almost always rather have another wiz in party than a fighter, even at L1

Don't forget Scribe Scroll and the resulting access to cheap L1 scrolls. Also, you can easily get a 4th slot from 20 Int. Charm Person is also great on L1, offering an entirely different kind of encounter you can solve. I've even used Prot Evil to solve a possession intrigue case. Not to even mention Silent Image and its innumerable uses.

And Daze is a worthwhile combat cantrip on 1-4 for action trading while your party beats up on a big humanoid enemy. Prestidigitation very worthwhile in scenarios. And most non-metagaming parties (or parties with creative DMs) are reliant on enemy analysis Knowledges, which Wizard uniquely excels at thanks to in-class + Int focus + potential Familiar roll/Aid Another (shared ranks).

And you have Craft: Alchemy (as a spellcaster) and Int-based class enabling pregame stocking up on alchemical items (quite powerful on low levels) cheaply.

And L1/2 Wizard with a Longbow/Crossbow is only -1 behind the martial types. Almost as good; it's just a stat check, really. Also, craft skills in general shine on L1.

[Gnaeus]

I mentioned scroll scribing. I don't feel like it's a good assumption that a casual player will hit int 20 at L1, and I was describing a basic PHB wizard. I do think a grease/sleep/color spray loadout is reasonable without too much opti fu.

Daze isn't bad, but I tend to see it more in PF as an at will. Between the type limitation and 1 round duration, I don't think of it as a must take over, for example, another detect magic. Especially when, as you say, level 1 combat is so swingy he can likely use a weapon only a few points behind other party members.

[emeraldstreak]

Especially when, as you say, level 1 combat is so swingy he can likely use a weapon only a few points behind other party members.

If level 1 combat were so swingy, there wouldn't be undefeated PvP arena champions.



Is it viable for a Human Wizard 1 to take Precocious Apprentice + Fiery Burst and have at-will 2d6 fire bursts all day?

If so, I think it's probably not the weakest T1.

Here's an example once used in actual wizards v mundanes PvE gauntlet
Here's a standard, 25-pb, 75gp 1st level Wizard with spell selection for damage and some disabling, ability to do decent damage all-day long via fiery burst, and tanking capacity via variant animal companion.


1st level Domain (fire) Illumian (krau) Wizard

trait: spellgifted (evocation)
flaw: noncombatant
flaw: murky-eyed

Str 8 Dex 16 (pb 10) Con 13 (pb 5) Int 16 (pb 10) Wis 8 Cha 8

racial Su and Ex: luminous sigils, power sigil (krau), glyphic resonance, final utterance, superior literacy

feats: precocious apprentice (scorching ray), fiery burst, bloodline of fire, scribe scroll

spells per day:
0: 3 + 1 domain
1: 1 + 1 int + 1 domain
2: 0 + 1 feat

attacks:
fiery burst (range 30', radius 5', damage 2d6, Ref half DC 15)
ranged touch +3
club: melee -3 1d6-1; ranged +3 1d6-1

spells known:
0 - all
1 - kelgore's firebolt, mage armor, power word: pain, power word: fatigue, enlarge person, true strike, burning hands (domain)
2 - scorching ray

example spells prepared:
0 - daze x3, flare (domain)
1 - kelgore's firebolt, true strike, burning hands (domain)
2 - scorching ray

caster level:
general 1 (1 base + 1 power sigil krau - 1 trait)
kelgore's firebolt 5 (5d6 at 150')
burning hands 7 (5d4 cone)
scorching ray 7 (two rays 4d6 each)

init +3, speed 30', hp 5
AC varies (dex +3, shield +2, mage armor +4)
fort +1, ref +3, will +1 (+2 racial v shadow spells)
skills: handle animal, concentration, spellcraft, ?, ?

equipment
heavy wooden shield 7gp
component pouch 5gp
spellbook (free)
outfit (free)
club (free)
5 self-crafted scrolls (mage armor, pw:pain, pw:fatigue, enlarge person, true strike) 62.5gp

Variant: gain animal companion of half druid progression, lose familiar (starting money is not enough for familiar ritual anyway)

Animal Companion: war-trained riding dog

init +2, speed 40', hp 13, AC 16 (14-20), fort +5 ref +5 will +1
attack: bite +3 1d6+3
attack when enlarged: bite +3 1d8+4
reach 5' (10' when enlarged)
SA: trip
Link, Share Spells
Tricks: ?

Tactics:

Normally, the wizard simply uses fiery burst. If anything gets close, the dog deals with it. Fiery burst is not affected by arcane spell failure, which allows the wizard to use a shield. It can be removed when resorting to spells.

There are several tactics against stronger opponents:
at distance: kelgore's firebolt or true strike+kelgore's firebolt
at closer distance: power word fatigue followed by power word pain or dog charge. Use daze to lock humanoid opponents.
at very close distance: burning hands

If that's not enough, there's always scorching ray for 2 x 4d6 (av. 28). A DC 8 CL check is needed to cast it, however it succeeds automatically. Use true strike to increase the hit chance.

A special note must be made about Share Spells and its tactics. It allows the wizard to share Mage Armor with his companion. More interestingly, it can allow sharing Enlarge Person and True Strike. So, cast Enlarge Person, share with dog (despite it not being a humanoid), move behind it, then enjoy the benefits of the dog's improved reach, damage, and trip. Boost with True Strike if needed.

[GrayDeath]

To the OP:

If you do not optimize more than "select fitting attribute values", yes.

Otherwise no.


More detailed answers see above. ;)

[RoboEmperor]

Low levels wizards are probably the one of the weakest.

Higher levels druids are one of the weakest.

[Gnaeus]

If level 1 combat were so swingy, there wouldn't be undefeated PvP arena champions.


If the undefeated PvP arena champion looks like your PVE guy, with useless flaws granting feats cherry picked around a level 1 build, then he less resembles a typical game wizard than I do IRL. I can do tournament optimization also, but I don't pretend that a tourney build accurately reflects a class in play, especially when it is full of stuff like accelerated casting, irrelevant flaws, ACFs and late splatbook material. I suspect most players in actual games don't design around optimized first level play, even if the DM allowed it.

[emeraldstreak]

If the undefeated PvP arena champion looks like your PVE guy

Level 1 PvP wizards take many forms (an example (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=21676159&postcount=13)). They are among the top contenders, but aren't the absolutely strongest.

[gkathellar]

In general, no.

More specifically, it helps to remember that tiers, at their best, describe a range of in-game behaviors and how easily classes can perform those behaviors. Wizards are often called the "strongest" tier one class, but what does that actually mean? I would argue it means they have among the highest number of ways to satisfy the criteria of tier one (which, distilled, comes down to, "can break narratives in a wide variety of ways,"), and in general have a practical ceiling above that of other tier one classes. This doesn't translate to being the most powerful all the time - it just means that wizards, in an assumed "default" environment, have by far the most tools with which to be powerful.


Low levels wizards are probably the one of the weakest.

Higher levels druids are one of the weakest.

Eh, sleep is perhaps the most potent save-or-suck in the game for the level at which it is acquired.

[emeraldstreak]

nevermind wrong thread

[digiman619]

That's kind of like asking "What's the weakest nuclear warhead?" Once you hit that level of power, it doesn't matter how much it overshadows conventional firepower.

[RoboEmperor]

Eh, sleep is perhaps the most potent save-or-suck in the game for the level at which it is acquired.

Doesn't compare to druid's animal companion or the druid and cleric's ability to wear armor and melee.

edit: As for spells, I dunno about druids but Clerics have Conjure Ice Beast. Guaranteed 1d6 cold damage a round in a 10ft radius in addition to a wolf's bite. Grab artifice or creation domains and they last 2-3 rounds, so a level 1 spell deals 2d6-3d6 in a 10ft radius in addition to flanking and wolf bites. Friendly fire is a concern though, but no spell can deal more damage than Conjure Ice Beast at level 1, making it arguably one of the best level 1 spells in the game.

[Gullintanni]

Arcane spells are inherently more powerful than divine. Wish vs Miracle is the perfect example of this. Furthermore, the arcane spell list has more of the broken spells on one list than any other individual list. Clerics and Druids have to go out of their way to get goodies like Polymorph Any Object and Planar Binding. Arcane spells can act as a stand-in for any given action any other character class is able to take, and in most cases do it better.

I actually find Wish v. Miracle to be a pretty poor example of this. "Safe" Wishes are more powerful than No XP cost Miracles - but, given that Miracle lacks the twisted wish and partial fulfilment clauses, and given that a Cleric's patron deity wants their Clerics to succeed, any request for a Miracle within a deities portfolio should be granted by RAW. Accordingly, a Cleric like Pelor would likely grant a request to "...[Swing] the tide of a battle in your favor by raising fallen allies to continue fighting", whereas Erythnul would achieve the same swing in the tide of battle by annihilating the opposing army outright, and Nerull would achieve the same by raising all the dead on the battlefield as undead and having them annihilate the opposing army.

Miracle requires the DM to impose limits in order for the spell to function without breaking the game; whereas Wish at least suggests limits in the form of the partial fulfilment clause. Also, some Miracles cost no XP, whereas no Wishes cost no XP (shenanigans notwithstanding).

To your general point though; Time Stop, Disjunction, Shapechange, Dominate Monster.

[Sleven]

I actually find Wish v. Miracle to be a pretty poor example of this. "Safe" Wishes are more powerful than No XP cost Miracles - but, given that Miracle lacks the twisted wish and partial fulfilment clauses, and given that a Cleric's patron deity wants their Clerics to succeed, any request for a Miracle within a deities portfolio should be granted by RAW. Accordingly, a Cleric like Pelor would likely grant a request to "...[Swing] the tide of a battle in your favor by raising fallen allies to continue fighting", whereas Erythnul would achieve the same swing in the tide of battle by annihilating the opposing army outright, and Nerull would achieve the same by raising all the dead on the battlefield as undead and having them annihilate the opposing army.

Miracle requires the DM to impose limits in order for the spell to function without breaking the game; whereas Wish at least suggests limits in the form of the partial fulfilment clause. Also, some Miracles cost no XP, whereas no Wishes cost no XP (shenanigans notwithstanding).

To your general point though; Time Stop, Disjunction, Shapechange, Dominate Monster.

When it comes to optimization discussions you never assume what a DM will/will not allow. With what is explicitly allowed, Wish is significantly more powerful. There is nothing RAW about your assumption that the result of a Miracle will be more powerful than the result of a Wish, or that it is without limitations, so let's agree to refrain from fallacious arguments. XP costs are easily mitigated and made meaningless outside of combat, so there's not much to that either.

If you're allowed to assume that a deity is going to give any Cleric with 9th level spells "teh best Miracles evar" then I'm allowed to assume that it's well within a 40+ Int Wizard's intellectual capabilities to figure out perfectly worded Wishes of significant power. Furthermore, a Wizard doesn't have to rely on a deity to tap into the infinite power of the cosmos, whereas the Cleric's Miracle is explicitly limited by requests that are in line with the deity's nature or alignment.

When it comes down to it, they both rely on DM rulings, and Wish has less constraints on what it can and cannot do. I don't really see how you can make a comparison here.

[Kayblis]

OP, I see your point. At first glance, the Wizard looks like a terrible class. Poor BAB, only 1 good save, d4 HP, 2+int skill points... the whole chassis is disappointing, inferior to any other class. But, the only actual class feature it has(other than bonus feats or a familiar, which aren't exclusive) is arguably stronger than any other class feature in the game - arcane spells are good and don't force you in an alignment or organization, and the Wizard Spell List is by far the best. Almost every spell people call "broken" or "too good to be used" come from it. You effectively have an "I win" button every spell level, with SoLs that pretty much end encounters if the dice roll your way.

Sure, all a wizard can do is use its spell slots. It's all he does. But while the Cleric and the Druid are casting small buffs(+3 AC, +2 to-hit...), the Wizard is casting Haste, Fly, Alter Self and Invisibility. While the divines are doing CC via small barriers and difficult terrain(often alignment-restricted), the Wizard is filling the battlefield with Stinky Clouds and Glitterdusts that effectively take someone out of the fight with a failed save. When a Cleric gets Divine Power to buff his melee damage, the Wizard gets Polymorph. While the Druid is collecting sticks to make a bonfire, the Wizard is chanting himself a Secure Shelter. Clerics try Turning, Wizards use Command Undead. He can make the most of each spell slot if he knows what he's doing.

Obviously the Wizard can't make everything at the same time. He's terrible early on thanks to almost no spell slots, and even as levels progress he still has to scribe most of his spells, which comes at its own cost. I would say the Wizard is the class with the most homework, planning ahead and picking your spells is a big part of how you work. And, as its fame suggests, it does pay off.

EDIT: Also, the class has a lot of ACFs, most of which are good for something, which helps you customize your wizard to whatever focus you'd like, including "Generalist". Trading your Familiar/Scribe Scroll/Bonus Feat for special goodies no one else has is always a good thing, and serves to give the Wizard some specialized class features.

[Gullintanni]

When it comes to optimization discussions you never assume what a DM will/will not allow. With what is explicitly allowed, Wish is significantly more powerful. There is nothing RAW about your assumption that the result of a Miracle will be more powerful than the result of a Wish, or that it is without limitations, so let's agree to refrain from fallacious arguments. XP costs are easily mitigated and made meaningless outside of combat, so there's not much to that either.

If you're allowed to assume that a deity is going to give any Cleric with 9th level spells "teh best Miracles evar" then I'm allowed to assume that it's well within a 40+ Int Wizard's intellectual capabilities to figure out perfectly worded Wishes of significant power. Furthermore, a Wizard doesn't have to rely on a deity to tap into the infinite power of the cosmos, whereas the Cleric's Miracle is explicitly limited by requests that are in line with the deity's nature or alignment.

When it comes down to it, they both rely on DM rulings, and Wish has less constraints on what it can and cannot do. I don't really see how you can make a comparison here.

Agree to disagree then. Miracle, by virtue of requiring no xp mitigation, oozes with low end versatility, and has at least the same power ceiling, by RAW, with no partial fulfillment clauses, save that the request must be in line with a Deities ethos.

If I was playing a Wizard, I'd trade Wish for Miracle if I could in nearly every situation. And as for "the best Miracles evar", keep in mind the explicitly allowed list of high powered Miracles in the SRD:

- Changing the outcome of a battle by raising the dead.
- Protecting cities from disasters.
- Perfect interplanar translocation for you and your friends.

This is what ending a campaign with a single spell looks like. YMMV - but from what I've seen around the table, Miracle is at least always on par with Wish.

EDIT: One additional caveat. There is literally zero support anywhere for intelligence or phrasing being at all relevant to the perversion of a Wish. The spell simply states that Wishes of great power are always a gamble. There is no correlation, explicit or implied, between intelligence and successful Wishes. Even if literal or malicious fulfilment could be circumvented through clever phrasing of a Wish, partial fulfilment can not.

[Eldariel]

Doesn't compare to druid's animal companion or the druid and cleric's ability to wear armor and melee.

edit: As for spells, I dunno about druids but Clerics have Conjure Ice Beast. Guaranteed 1d6 cold damage a round in a 10ft radius in addition to a wolf's bite. Grab artifice or creation domains and they last 2-3 rounds, so a level 1 spell deals 2d6-3d6 in a 10ft radius in addition to flanking and wolf bites. Friendly fire is a concern though, but no spell can deal more damage than Conjure Ice Beast at level 1, making it arguably one of the best level 1 spells in the game.

Armor is pretty weak on 1 due to costs. And melee too due to risk.

[rel]

Druid and cleric get a better chasis; better BAB, Hit Dice, skills (cleric needs certain domains for this to be true) and non casting class features (turning to fuel DMM and other powers, wildshape, animal companion, spontaneous spells, etc).

HOWEVER the true strength of the big 3 is their spellcasting and the wizard has the best spell list. While the cleric and especially druid might seem a bit stronger due to their other class features the wizards spell list is generally a big enough advantage to maintain parity at pretty much any level of play.

[Kayblis]

Doesn't compare to druid's animal companion or the druid and cleric's ability to wear armor and melee.

edit: As for spells, I dunno about druids but Clerics have Conjure Ice Beast. Guaranteed 1d6 cold damage a round in a 10ft radius in addition to a wolf's bite. Grab artifice or creation domains and they last 2-3 rounds, so a level 1 spell deals 2d6-3d6 in a 10ft radius in addition to flanking and wolf bites. Friendly fire is a concern though, but no spell can deal more damage than Conjure Ice Beast at level 1, making it arguably one of the best level 1 spells in the game.

Well, if you're judging by "how far can you take it" level 1 builds, a wizard can instagib anything with 1HD with a single lv 1 spell(Fell Drain + Metamagic School Focus or Practiced Metamagic), no save. Sure, it's possible, but it's not really seen in play. Also, Artifice and Creation domains aren't what you'd call "good" - they barely work as a way to give summoning an early start - and by no means is CIB I "one of the best" level 1 spells. At level 1, you use your weapons to deal damage and spells to do utility, letting your fighter friend shine in combat. Wasting one of your 3 spells per day to deal the same damage as a fighter for a round or two is a terrible use of spells.

[Endarire]

I agree that Wizards of various levels can use a small number of spells to drastically alter or end encounters favorably to them. However, as a frequent Wizard player, I felt disappointed that we kept playing mostly at low levels (1-6) where Wizards just didn't get that much to do aside from spell slots, reserve feats (on rare occasion), and the occasional physical attack. In higher level campaigns, I've enjoyed more freedom as a Wizard when the GM wasn't curbing Wizard power due to unexpected plot reasons. One of my main complaints as a player is a lack of stamina as a Wizard since typically everything important that a Wizard does requires a spell slot.

Having played a Druid at low levels (starting at 1 and now 3 in a campaign scheduled to reach 20+), I better understand why people considered them so powerful. They can potentially do something every round as themselves or/and their companion without needing spell slots. And they get spell slots, armored casting, healing, crowd control, buffing, summoning (spontaneously!), etc.

I'm not saying Druids are always better than Wizards nor vice versa, but I also felt like I moved on from "I want to be super important but rarely!" to "I want to continuously contribute and be engaged."

[Eldariel]

That's not really a power difference but style. A Wizard can indeed annihilate about 4 encounters on level 1 but rest of the time he's using cantrips (of which only Daze has direct offensive use), weapons (generally Bow/Xbow) or alchemical items (again, Craft: Alchemy is a huge improvement in their affordability).

That said, on L1 those contributions are more than fine generally, and there's always the Animal Companion ACF though that loses luster swiftly (once you can afford a familiar and the companion's 50% progression catches up to it on L3-4). Still, high Int and Knowledges enable a different, utility/optimality aligned contributions pretty much all the time. They have fewer effective in-combat actions, but those few actions pack quite the punch.


In short, Wizard has to conserve their strong round to round options but theirs are the strongest when used. And they can contribute to overcoming encounters beyond the round-per-round layer by identifying enemy weaknesses and dangerous special attacks.

Very different from something like a Druid but very powerful in their own way. And like, shooting a bow or throwing Alchemist's Fires is more than fine on L1 too. Generally Wizard Dex lends itself well to ranged combat.

[Endarire]

Thinking to higher levels (7ish), my experience has been that the Wizard has generally been the strongest per action but lacked the stamina to spend more than a spell or 3 per fight with the rest of my spell slots being devoted to buffs and utility. (An Incantatrix for buffing I have often been.)

[Eldariel]

Thinking to higher levels (7ish), my experience has been that the Wizard has generally been the strongest per action but lacked the stamina to spend more than a spell or 3 per fight with the rest of my spell slots being devoted to buffs and utility. (An Incantatrix for buffing I have often been.)

Yeah, Incantatrix is its own thing. Costs you slots. If you prepare mostly offense on level 7 tho, you have slots to spare: Enlarge Person, Grease, Ray of Enfeeblement, Glitterdust, Web, Pyrotechnics, Slow, Haste, Stinking Cloud, etc. You can particularly burn numerous lower level spells per encounter, and the options scale quite well.

Though few encounters take that many slots, particularly if you use some level 4s like Black Tentacles or Solid Fog.

[Nifft]

Yeah, Incantatrix is its own thing. Costs you slots.

The one in my books costs you a school, not slots.

You get all the slots.

[Eldariel]

The one in my books costs you a school, not slots.

You get all the slots.

I meant, if you're gonna persist a ton of spells, you'll have fewer slots for combat.

[RoboEmperor]

Well, if you're judging by "how far can you take it" level 1 builds, a wizard can instagib anything with 1HD with a single lv 1 spell(Fell Drain + Metamagic School Focus or Practiced Metamagic), no save. Sure, it's possible, but it's not really seen in play. Also, Artifice and Creation domains aren't what you'd call "good" - they barely work as a way to give summoning an early start - and by no means is CIB I "one of the best" level 1 spells. At level 1, you use your weapons to deal damage and spells to do utility, letting your fighter friend shine in combat. Wasting one of your 3 spells per day to deal the same damage as a fighter for a round or two is a terrible use of spells.

I grab artifice domain regularly for fabricate.

You forget CIB is AoE. If it lasts only 1 round then you don't have to worry about friendly fire. Cast it, deal 1d6 cold damage in a 10ft radius, have it flank a creature and deliver a bite, and it will continue to flank that creature until the start of your turn. So if you're saying a Flank, AoE Damage, and a melee attack for a level 1 spell slot is bad then I'm gonna have to doubt your mastery of the game.

edit: I also forgot about damage sponge. Unless your DM is metagaming the CIB is gonna eat a round of attacks because it's gonna be in the middle of the enemy mob.


I agree that Wizards of various levels can use a small number of spells to drastically alter or end encounters favorably to them. However, as a frequent Wizard player, I felt disappointed that we kept playing mostly at low levels (1-6) where Wizards just didn't get that much to do aside from spell slots, reserve feats (on rare occasion), and the occasional physical attack. In higher level campaigns, I've enjoyed more freedom as a Wizard when the GM wasn't curbing Wizard power due to unexpected plot reasons. One of my main complaints as a player is a lack of stamina as a Wizard since typically everything important that a Wizard does requires a spell slot.

Having played a Druid at low levels (starting at 1 and now 3 in a campaign scheduled to reach 20+), I better understand why people considered them so powerful. They can potentially do something every round as themselves or/and their companion without needing spell slots. And they get spell slots, armored casting, healing, crowd control, buffing, summoning (spontaneously!), etc.

I'm not saying Druids are always better than Wizards nor vice versa, but I also felt like I moved on from "I want to be super important but rarely!" to "I want to continuously contribute and be engaged."

Your build is wrong. Fiery Burst is OP when gotten at 3. I had mundanes grumble because I do as much damage as they do, except in an AoE, at range, with a 100% chance to hit (since a miss is still half damage). If you know your campaign is gonna end early then go an early game oriented wizard build like a conjuration focused specialist for spell slots with reserve feats and abrupt jaunt. You can also use retraining rules to retrain into a lategame wizard, so you are strong all game.

[lord_khaine]

Thinking to higher levels (7ish), my experience has been that the Wizard has generally been the strongest per action but lacked the stamina to spend more than a spell or 3 per fight with the rest of my spell slots being devoted to buffs and utility. (An Incantatrix for buffing I have often been.)Yeah, Incantatrix is its own thing. Costs you slots. If you prepare mostly offense on level 7 tho, you have slots to spare: Enlarge Person, Grease, Ray of Enfeeblement, Glitterdust, Web, Pyrotechnics, Slow, Haste, Stinking Cloud, etc. You can particularly burn numerous lower level spells per encounter, and the options scale quite well.

Arrgg.. cant one of you please get an avatar? Its really hard to keep track of who is saying what, when the only difference in your name lies at the last syllable :smalltongue:


You can also use retraining rules to retrain into a lategame wizard, so you are strong all game.

Its not always thats available though. I have not seen any game where there were free retraining myself. There were always some limits on what could be done.

[Pugwampy]

Grease, Hypnotism, Color Spray, Abrupt Jaunt, Summon Monster I...

goblin farts .............wizard dies .

[gkathellar]

In general, a low-op wizard's best options are hostile battlefield control effects. Nothing really compares to shutting down the entire fight with one standard action. Take a moment to reread Solid Fog - it's almost comically powerful.

A more party-oriented wizard will get mileage out of a well-placed Grease or Black Tentacles, but the same principle applies. People tend to focus on optimization tricks and Schrodinger's Spellbook when tier discussions come out, but what makes wizard the strongest class, in general, is its hypothetical ability to radically redefine the parameters of just about every situation it enters.

(Sleep is a stand-out at early levels because a wizard with a scythe has the damage essentially built in, and applies it at their leisure. Even in earlier editions, you'll hear plenty of stories about 1st level magic users who should be dead to rights tossing out the dreaded sleep of winning.)


goblin farts .............wizard dies .

At 1st level, sure, but as opposed to what, running up to a bunch of orcs with greataxes as a fighter? Unless they neutralize the threat first (which wizards excel at, see also: sleep, color spray, grease), everyone gets instagibbed at level 1.

I mean unless they have Abrupt Jaunt in which case ... huh.

[Marlowe]

Can someone point out to me this "Fart" attack Goblins have that's apparently good for at least 4-6 Damage? I can only find this 1d6 Morningstar attack and 1d4 Javelin attack on the SRD.

[Eldariel]

goblin farts .............wizard dies .

Wizard should have 5-6 HP at least, which is enough to take one minor damage effect. That said, who cares? If the Wizard positions properly they won't be taking damage and if they pull out one of their nukes...well, disabled enemies can't even fart. Really, level 1 is mostly about getting the first hit in since anyone can die/go down to a single hit. And Abrupt Jaunt allows dodging damage effects.

[Cosi]

Wizards go down to one hit at 1st level, but that's not all that bad. Even durable characters are unlikely to take two hits, and sleep or color spray eliminate enemies a good deal more effectively than a sword.

On the topic of the thread, no Wizard is not the weakest Tier One class. The weakest Tier One class is either the Druid (because it has the least cheese, and that is what the Tiers are nominally about), or the Artificer/Archivist/Erudite (because they are hideously dependent on the DM explicitly okaying their best tricks)

[Inevitability]

goblin farts .............wizard dies .

I listed what's literally the best way to avoid damage at level 1 (well, aside from a new non-class-specific ways that are irrelevant here) and you ignore that?

[Kayblis]

I agree that Wizards of various levels can use a small number of spells to drastically alter or end encounters favorably to them. However, as a frequent Wizard player, I felt disappointed that we kept playing mostly at low levels (1-6) where Wizards just didn't get that much to do aside from spell slots, reserve feats (on rare occasion), and the occasional physical attack. In higher level campaigns, I've enjoyed more freedom as a Wizard when the GM wasn't curbing Wizard power due to unexpected plot reasons. One of my main complaints as a player is a lack of stamina as a Wizard since typically everything important that a Wizard does requires a spell slot.

Having played a Druid at low levels (starting at 1 and now 3 in a campaign scheduled to reach 20+), I better understand why people considered them so powerful. They can potentially do something every round as themselves or/and their companion without needing spell slots. And they get spell slots, armored casting, healing, crowd control, buffing, summoning (spontaneously!), etc.

I'm not saying Druids are always better than Wizards nor vice versa, but I also felt like I moved on from "I want to be super important but rarely!" to "I want to continuously contribute and be engaged."

I feel you. Wizards have the worst 1st level in the game, while Druids and Barbarians have the best 1st level in the game(as in 1st level characters, not a 1 lv dip). That's why most non-forum users think Barbarian is a good class - it's a great one at low levels where static +2 buffs mean a lot.

Many games never get far, and most of them start at pretty low levels. It's easier on the DM and on newbie players to have a smaller pool of options to draw from. Most of what's known as "bad DMs doing bad stuff" revolves around a DM not being able to deal with the increasing repertoire of casters, something every DM struggles with at some point. But yeah, the game itself changes when some levels are achieved, and the game is basically made to work for levels 5~14, but this isn't stated anywhere in the core books so some people insist in starting level 1 "just to be sure". A fun twist on that exists in the World of Darkness RPG, a d20 system where all players effectively have 4HD at level 1. The first character level gets you 4x the HP, BAB and saves, 7x the skills and two feats. It's a system that saw what happened with D&D and understands the number gap in which the game works best.

EDIT:

I grab artifice domain regularly for fabricate.

You forget CIB is AoE. If it lasts only 1 round then you don't have to worry about friendly fire. Cast it, deal 1d6 cold damage in a 10ft radius, have it flank a creature and deliver a bite, and it will continue to flank that creature until the start of your turn. So if you're saying a Flank, AoE Damage, and a melee attack for a level 1 spell slot is bad then I'm gonna have to doubt your mastery of the game.

edit: I also forgot about damage sponge. Unless your DM is metagaming the CIB is gonna eat a round of attacks because it's gonna be in the middle of the enemy mob.

Never said that. I said CIB is by no means one of the best. Sure, level 1 games where your enemies have 5 HP? Anything that can deal 2d6 sounds OP by nature, but so is the Greatsword the Fighter is using. Flanking gives a small bonus, and maybe 1d6 if you have a Rogue. AoE doesn't mean that much when you're not supposed to fight large groups of mobs. That's the point, judging things around level 1 is dumb because the game is at its most fragile then, and judging someone's "mastery of the game" by their opinion on a 1st level spell on level 1 is like judging someone's capacity to solve matrices by their ability to do subtraction.

[Elkad]

AoE doesn't mean that much when you're not supposed to fight large groups of mobs.

Yeah, I pulled it out of context, but where is that written down?


Mobs outnumber the party in probably half the encounters I use. Sometimes by a lot. And I tend to big party games (6-8 PCs, plus sidekicks that may double that). Which means a +3 (difficult) encounter for a party of 8 L1 characters will be 16 goblins plus a leader with a single class level. Cleric with Bless and Magic Weapon (cast on a bag of sling stones or arrows, every goblin grabs 3).

At L7, they might get a dozen big monsters, or 50-80 standard goblins plus a mix of leaders with class levels.

I can think of several classic modules where a careless party can end up fighting hundreds of monsters at once. Vegepygmies in Barrier Peaks. Barbarians in Isle of the Ape. Et al.

[emeraldstreak]

I listed what's literally the best way to avoid damage at level 1 (well, aside from a new non-class-specific ways that are irrelevant here) and you ignore that?

It's not that he ignored it, he simply has no idea what you were talking about.

A lot of people play Core-only or Core+just a few splats, and also lack the basics of optimization, like understanding how much AC is worth, and how much hp are worth.

[Gnaeus]

I feel you. Wizards have the worst 1st level in the game, while Druids and Barbarians have the best 1st level in the game(as in 1st level characters, not a 1 lv dip). That's why most non-forum users think Barbarian is a good class - it's a great one at low levels where static +2 buffs mean a lot.

EDIT:


Never said that. I said CIB is by no means one of the best. Sure, level 1 games where your enemies have 5 HP? Anything that can deal 2d6 sounds OP by nature, but so is the Greatsword the Fighter is using. Flanking gives a small bonus, and maybe 1d6 if you have a Rogue. AoE doesn't mean that much when you're not supposed to fight large groups of mobs. That's the point, judging things around level 1 is dumb because the game is at its most fragile then, and judging someone's "mastery of the game" by their opinion on a 1st level spell on level 1 is like judging someone's capacity to solve matrices by their ability to do subtraction.

It does not!!! Compare wiz 1 to rogue 1.
Skill points probably similar, after the difference in int is factored in. Once the familiar is in play, wizard likely has an advantage in skill checks. Wizard has added utility from cantrips.

Wizard has good will, rogue good reflex. Will is better, and again, wiz can get a +2 with a familiar pick.

Same BaB.

AC likely similar. Wiz may have an advantage if using mage armor. Wiz can easily wear leather and restrict himself to only a 90% chance of disabling an encounter 3/day.

All rogue gets is sneak attack, but to use it he likely has to be in melee with his junk hp and AC. And he needs a flanker, which is not always possible. And which isn't even relevant against many common level 1 foes since it is just overkill, or often useless. When we explore the skeleton filled graveyard, the wizard can trade his color spray and sleep for a buff and a second grease. The rogue can't afford weapon crystals at 1. He's basically a crummy fighter with bad hp and AC.

And then there's scribe scroll, which is amazing at L1.

Level 1 wizard is better than rogue or monk, likely better than fighter or Paladin. It has one of the best non combat contributions in the game at L1, and can turn the balance in 2-4 key combats.

[Aquillion]

It's really too hard to say, because it depends on a lot of factors. More than other classes, T1 classes are sensitive to how much you optimize.

With minimal optimization, a Druid is probably best, since they're really really hard to screw up. Even then, though, it depends on spell selection, what they regularly turn into, and if they take Natural Spell.

With extreme optimization and a DM who allows all shenangians, StP Erudite or Archivist is almost strictly superior to wizard. Few games would allow them to reach that point, though. (On the other hand, with a DM who bans shenanigans, StP Erudite doesn't exist and Archivist is strictly worse than the Cleric.)

Wizard is probably at its best somewhere between those two extremes, with high "practical" optimization.

[Deophaun]

I listed what's literally the best way to avoid damage at level 1 (well, aside from a new non-class-specific ways that are irrelevant here) and you ignore that?
I'm going to assume you mean Abrupt Jaunt, but it doesn't really help you avoid damage. It can ruin a charge or spoil a full attack routine, but if you're still in range of the bow or the melee attacker still has movement to reach you, you're still getting stuck simply because the nature of attacks make them all or nothing affairs; there's no stopping the rest of the dominoes from falling once the first one is tipped over.

[Doctor Awkward]

"Is Wizard the weakest Tier 1 class?"

No.
They are easily the second strongest of the top tiers. The only reason Druid competes with them at all is because it's practically impossible to play a druid poorly, while a wizard has a far higher mastery floor.

Point #1: The Spell List
Arcane spells are better overall than divine. Wish vs. Miracle is a bad example of this. Instead look at the huge number of arguments that clerics are just as good as wizards not on account of their own divine spells, but rather because of domains that give them access to various arcane spells.

Point #2: "Wizard's can't melee!"
Yes, I will concede that wizard's do have a fairly limited selection of options for pretending to be one of those pathetic grunts that wades into melee combat and risks death and dismemberment every battle.
...But they also don't need to. A wizard with a wand of Melf's Acid Arrow and a Fly spell beats a Tarrasque.

Point #3: "Artificers and StP Erudites can do everything."
I often see a lot of love for the artificer, followed by a number of admissions that most folks haven't actually played one in a high-op game. Well I have. And I promise you that in practice they aren't quite as powerful as they are in a vacuum. The one important aspect most people seem to overlook is that in order to use a magic item you must first be holding it in your hand. So you might have an infinite scroll case strapped to your belt but you are only pulling out one at a time (or zero, if you need to move somewhere that round). You aren't casting Nerveskitter during initiative unless you have it in your staff/wand/scroll that happens to be in your hand at the time. You are flinging off multiple spells per round at high levels because you can't hold all of the potential spells you might need at a moments notice in your available limbs all at once. Furthermore, scrolls and wands don't advance with you as you level. A scroll of Summon Monster I that you created at level 2 will still only last for two rounds at level 8. Sure, you can recycle them for the crafting points but that's money that you will never get back. And sitting down for three weeks every time you level to retool all of your frequently used items is beyond impractical in a game where crafting time might be limited to begin with.

Erudites similarly suffer from absurd practical limitations when trying to rip spells for their repertoire. As noted on page 154 of Complete Psionic, he must make physical contact before they can establish a mental link and browse the list for spells in order to even be allowed to make a single check, and then even if he succeeds he must then spend 8 hours in silent meditation in order to commit the chosen spell to memory. And that's per spell. Approaching a sleeping wizard for a Vulcan mind-meld is about as easy as stealing his spellbook. This isn't even getting into the limited unique powers per day: at level 15, eight only SOUNDS like plenty (compared to a specialist wizard of similar level, who can prepare 44).

Meanwhile, Wizards have just as theoretically infinite a spell selection as Erudite does with no practical limits on how they can apply it. They aren't hosed with two casting stats like Archivist is. They have easy access to Abrupt Jaunt, Uncanny Forethought and Metamagic feats. They get a free familiar to break the action economy. And the higher they get in level the more impossible they are to kill.

[Inevitability]

I'm going to assume you mean Abrupt Jaunt, but it doesn't really help you avoid damage. It can ruin a charge or spoil a full attack routine, but if you're still in range of the bow or the melee attacker still has movement to reach you, you're still getting stuck simply because the nature of attacks make them all or nothing affairs; there's no stopping the rest of the dominoes from falling once the first one is tipped over.

Most wizards aren't going to wander too far from the melee guys. Putting someone in full armor between you and the enemy is going to make it hard for them to hit you. Not to mention that a lot of dungeons there'll be terrain height differences and other obstacles you could use.

[Eldariel]

Most wizards aren't going to wander too far from the melee guys. Putting someone in full armor between you and the enemy is going to make it hard for them to hit you. Not to mention that a lot of dungeons there'll be terrain height differences and other obstacles you could use.

Not to mention, hiding spots (trees, walls, etc.), things blocking line of sight or effect (lighting conditions and such), etc. If you teleport 10' away from the archer, you might be able to just teleport out of their range of vision, field of vision, or line of fire for instance. Same vs. spellcasters and martials. Just teleport 10' sideways and basically every charge is foiled.

[gkathellar]

"Is Wizard the weakest Tier 1 class?"

No.
They are easily the second strongest of the top tiers. The only reason Druid competes with them at all is because it's practically impossible to play a druid poorly, while a wizard has a far higher mastery floor.

Point #1: The Spell List
Arcane spells are better overall than divine. Wish vs. Miracle is a bad example of this. Instead look at the huge number of arguments that clerics are just as good as wizards not on account of their own divine spells, but rather because of domains that give them access to various arcane spells.

Point #2: "Wizard's can't melee!"
Yes, I will concede that wizard's do have a fairly limited selection of options for pretending to be one of those pathetic grunts that wades into melee combat and risks death and dismemberment every battle.
...But they also don't need to. A wizard with a wand of Melf's Acid Arrow and a Fly spell beats a Tarrasque.

Point #3: "Artificers and StP Erudites can do everything."
I often see a lot of love for the artificer, followed by a number of admissions that most folks haven't actually played one in a high-op game. Well I have. And I promise you that in practice they aren't quite as powerful as they are in a vacuum. The one important aspect most people seem to overlook is that in order to use a magic item you must first be holding it in your hand. So you might have an infinite scroll case strapped to your belt but you are only pulling out one at a time (or zero, if you need to move somewhere that round). You aren't casting Nerveskitter during initiative unless you have it in your staff/wand/scroll that happens to be in your hand at the time. You are flinging off multiple spells per round at high levels because you can't hold all of the potential spells you might need at a moments notice in your available limbs all at once. Furthermore, scrolls and wands don't advance with you as you level. A scroll of Summon Monster I that you created at level 2 will still only last for two rounds at level 8. Sure, you can recycle them for the crafting points but that's money that you will never get back. And sitting down for three weeks every time you level to retool all of your frequently used items is beyond impractical in a game where crafting time might be limited to begin with.

Erudites similarly suffer from absurd practical limitations when trying to rip spells for their repertoire. As noted on page 154 of Complete Psionic, he must make physical contact before they can establish a mental link and browse the list for spells in order to even be allowed to make a single check, and then even if he succeeds he must then spend 8 hours in silent meditation in order to commit the chosen spell to memory. And that's per spell. Approaching a sleeping wizard for a Vulcan mind-meld is about as easy as stealing his spellbook. This isn't even getting into the limited unique powers per day: at level 15, eight only SOUNDS like plenty (compared to a specialist wizard of similar level, who can prepare 44).

Meanwhile, Wizards have just as theoretically infinite a spell selection as Erudite does with no practical limits on how they can apply it. They aren't hosed with two casting stats like Archivist is. They have easy access to Abrupt Jaunt, Uncanny Forethought and Metamagic feats. They get a free familiar to break the action economy. And the higher they get in level the more impossible they are to kill.

One other problem with StP erudite: barring a higher-level erudite to learn from, its spells will always be one level below its powers. That's bad even at lower levels (no sleep at level one makes Ialdabode a dull boy), but it means they're locked out of ninth level spells forever without an epic erudite's help.

[Thurbane]

As possibly already mentioned, Clerics and Druids have the benefit of instantly having access to every single spell on their class list, in every splatbook ever, simply by reaching the level required to cast it.

The Wizard needs a bit more of a "Mother May I?" approach to the DM, except for the automatic spells he gains as he levels up (which, to be fair, can be cheesed out with the right sub levels etc.). Also the Cleric or Druid have no need to rack up hours, days and weeks scribing spells into a book.

The restrictions a Cleric faces (play nice by his gods general ethos and alignment) are, in my experience at least, far less frustrating.

The Druid has less harsh restrictions still: don't wear certain armor, don't take one of 4 forbidden alignments, and in some nebulous sense be generally nice to plants and animals. Oh, and don't teach our super special secret handshake language to non-Druids.

All of this weighed up against the relative power of Sor/Wiz spells vs. Clr or Drd spells gives the divine guys the edge, IMHO.

[Deophaun]

Just teleport 10' sideways and basically every charge is foiled.
Strangely this is not the case. Charging requires there to be an unobstructed line between where you start your charge and the target, and it requires that you move directly to the closest position from which you can attack. Teleportation sideways does not spoil those conditions unless you teleport to a point where there is something between you and the start position. This actually means you can charge through creatures or unstable terrain if your target moves in the middle of your charge as long as those things are a) between you and the closest position from which you can attack and b) not between your start position and the target.

[gkathellar]

Strangely this is not the case. Charging requires there to be an unobstructed line between where you start your charge and the target, and it requires that you move directly to the closest position from which you can attack. Teleportation sideways does not spoil those conditions unless you teleport to a point where there is something between you and the start position. This actually means you can charge through creatures or unstable terrain if your target moves in the middle of your charge as long as those things are a) between you and the closest position from which you can attack and b) not between your start position and the target.

I want to be sure I understand your reading of the charge rules, so I'm going to lay out what I think you're saying sequentially:

0. Franklin Fighter (FF) is 30 feet away from Wally Wizard (WW).
1. FF declares he is going to charge at WW.
2. FF moves 30 feet towards WW as part of the charge.
3. WW uses Abrupt Jaunt as an immediate action to move 10 feet to the side.
4. FF may now retroactively redraw the line of his charge to take him to WW's new position.

Is this what you're saying takes place?

EDIT: Alternately, are you suggesting that because the movement and attack of a charge are parts of a single action, the jaunt can take place before or after the charge, but not during? If so, I have to point out that MtG's stack is not a rule in D&D, and immediate actions can explicitly interrupt things.

[Necroticplague]

Personally, were i to rate the various t1 against each other, it would be something like this:
Stp Erudite=Artificer>Archivist>Druid>wizard>cleric.

[Deophaun]

4. FF may now retroactively redraw the line of his charge to take him to WW's new position.
No. There's nothing retroactive. You can literally turn if you opponent moves in the middle of your charge. Here's the SRD:

You must have a clear path toward the opponent, and nothing can hinder your movement (such as difficult terrain or obstacles). Here’s what it means to have a clear path. First, you must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent. (If this space is occupied or otherwise blocked, you can’t charge.) Second, if any line from your starting space to the ending space passes through a square that blocks movement, slows movement, or contains a creature (even an ally), you can’t charge. (Helpless creatures don’t stop a charge.)
The only line mentioned is based on your starting space. As long as that remains clear after your opponent moves, you are still within movement range, and the closest space you can attack your opponent from is not blocked, you can continue the charge in the new direction.

[Cosi]

Personally, were i to rate the various t1 against each other, it would be something like this:
Stp Erudite=Artificer>Archivist>Druid>wizard>cleric.

I don't think a ranking that puts the Erudite and the Artificer on top, but the Wizard below the Druid makes sense. If you have the ability to dumpster dive for every spell as an StP Erudite (necessary to not be a worse Wizard), the Wizard has enough options to be better than the Druid.

[gkathellar]

No. There's nothing retroactive. You can literally turn if you opponent moves in the middle of your charge. Here's the SRD:

The only line mentioned is based on your starting space. As long as that remains clear after your opponent moves, you are still within movement range, and the closest space you can attack your opponent from is not blocked, you can continue the charge in the new direction.

Edit: Charge is very specific in stating that the attack takes place after the movement, and that the movement ends when the designated opponent is within reach of your attack. There is no continuing the movement after this prerequisite is fulfilled - hence, the user of Abrupt Jaunt need only wait until the movement ends and the attack begins.

This is RAW - however, just like the claim that you can zig-zag during a charge, it's pretty clearly not intent, and so is probably best ignored. We're getting into the same territory where you can deal sneak attack damage with an Intimidate check in PF - technically true, but not worth exploring.

[Deophaun]

Edit: Charge is very specific in stating that the attack takes place after the movement, and that the movement ends when the designated opponent is within reach of your attack. There is no continuing the movement after this prerequisite is fulfilled - hence, the user of Abrupt Jaunt need only wait until the movement ends and the attack begins.
If the attack begins, then it doesn't matter. The attack has begun. You roll the d20. You assess damage. As I said previously, there is nothing you can do to stop it once the first domino has fallen. So, you either Abrupt Jaunt before the attack takes place, in which case the charge continues, or after, in which case whether you more or where you move doesn't impact the outcome anyway.

[Necroticplague]

I don't think a ranking that puts the Erudite and the Artificer on top, but the Wizard below the Druid makes sense. If you have the ability to dumpster dive for every spell as an StP Erudite (necessary to not be a worse Wizard), the Wizard has enough options to be better than the Druid.

Druids don't need to dumpster dive in-character to get spells (they can prep from their whole list every day) and are thus less dm dependent, Wild shape allows for them to not be as reliant on spells for buffs, they have access to more broken PRCs, wisdom is a more useful stat than intelligence to cast using, and druids have some unique forms of abuse. Artificer and Erudite are on top because their theoretical maximums include literally all of casting and manifesting, then Archivists that include all of casting, then other t1s based on how much unique abuse I find their own features to allow.

[gkathellar]

If the attack begins, then it doesn't matter. The attack has begun. You roll the d20. You assess damage. As I said previously, there is nothing you can do to stop it once the first domino has fallen. So, you either Abrupt Jaunt before the attack takes place, in which case the charge continues, or after, in which case whether you more or where you move doesn't impact the outcome anyway.

So, once again to clarify, you're alleging that (a) it is not possible to act in between the movement and the attack of a charge, and (b) teleporting out of reach of a melee attack as an immediate action does not actually bring you out of reach of that attack, (and that it will still deal damage, presumably by spewing fast-moving rules text at the opponent).

Is this accurate? Because while (a) is at least coherent, I think (b) speaks for itself.

[Deophaun]

So, once again to clarify, you're alleging that (a) it is not possible to act in between the movement and the attack of a charge
Not sure what you mean. You can certainly act in the middle to spoil the charge, it's just that moving sideways doesn't guarantee it.

and (b) teleporting out of reach of a melee attack as an immediate action does not actually bring you out of reach of that attack, (and that it will still deal damage, presumably by spewing fast-moving rules text at the opponent).
You have a choice: You either teleport out of reach before the melee attack occurs, in which case the attacker doesn't spend the standard action and can retask it (see wings of cover, which isn't new rules but simply the result of how the rules for attacking are written in the PHB), or you teleport after the attack has occurred, in which case you'll get hit or not. There's no point where you can teleport after the action has taken place and somehow avoid the consequences of that attack. If they haven't rolled a d20, they haven't attacked, they still have their action. If they've rolled a d20 and it matches or exceeds your AC, they roll damage and you take it. You need need an ability that explicitly broke this sequence of events, which Abrupt Jaunt doesn't say it does, so it doesn't.

[Cosi]

Druids don't need to dumpster dive in-character to get spells (they can prep from their whole list every day) and are thus less dm dependent, Wild shape allows for them to not be as reliant on spells for buffs, they have access to more broken PRCs, wisdom is a more useful stat than intelligence to cast using, and druids have some unique forms of abuse. Artificer and Erudite are on top because their theoretical maximums include literally all of casting and manifesting, then Archivists that include all of casting, then other t1s based on how much unique abuse I find their own features to allow.

I don't think you can ignore the low floors of Artificer/Archivist/Erudite if you're crediting the Druid for its high floor. Also, the Planar Shepherd is only better than e.g. the Incantatrix if you have access to a fast-time plane, which is setting specific (IIRC, none of the default planes are).

[lord_khaine]

I don't think you can ignore the low floors of Artificer/Archivist/Erudite if you're crediting the Druid for its high floor. Also, the Planar Shepherd is only better than e.g. the Incantatrix if you have access to a fast-time plane, which is setting specific (IIRC, none of the default planes are).

I honestly dont think the druid has a particularly high floor. It has been repeated several times. But it seems mainly by the druid expects, for whom optimising wild shapes and managing animal companions comes as natural as the memorised Summon Natures ally list.

At the other end of the spectrum i have seen a lot of really sucky druids, who mainly hung back and threw little beads of flame.

[Hecuba]

I honestly dont think the druid has a particularly high floor. It has been repeated several times. But it seems mainly by the druid expects, for whom optimising wild shapes and managing animal companions comes as natural as the memorised Summon Natures ally list.

At the other end of the spectrum i have seen a lot of really sucky druids, who mainly hung back and threw little beads of flame.

There's a significant difference between un-optimized wild shape use and not using it at all. Yes, a fleshraker is usually a better option than a wolf. And there is probably a better option than a parrot if you want to fly. But if you at least read the details of the Wild Shape ability and try to use it, it can cover wide array of situations where other prepared casters would have to worry about preparing the right spell. Because parrot and wolf are often good enough.

That said, other prepared casters can somewhat replicate the result by keeping a couple alter selfs and/or polymorphs prepped in lower level slots. It just comes into its own a bit later and requires a bit more forethought than does noticing your level 5 class feature.

[ayvango]

Wizards has many wonderful prestige classes and cleric and druid lacks one. There is ruby knight vindicator for cleric and planar shepherd for druid. Wizards has many. Unfortunately both rkv and shepherd is late 3.5 material too close to 4.0 and often fails to ban.

[Eldariel]

Wizards has many wonderful prestige classes and cleric and druid lacks one. There is ruby knight vindicator for cleric and planar shepherd for druid. Wizards has many. Unfortunately both rkv and shepherd is late 3.5 material too close to 4.0 and often fails to ban.

Uh? Cleric has tons upon tons of more than solid PRCs. Quick listing off the top of my head:
Dweomerkeeper [CDiv Web]
Hathran [PGtF]
Divine Disciple [PGtF]
Church Inquisitor [CDiv]
Contemplative [CDiv]
Radiant Servant [CDiv]
Sacred Exorcist [CDiv]
Divine Oracle [CDiv]
Shadow Adept [FRCs]

Etc. And they already have Divine Metamagic from the get-go so they can focus on getting domains and abilities and such.

[Gnaeus]

I honestly dont think the druid has a particularly high floor. It has been repeated several times. But it seems mainly by the druid expects, for whom optimising wild shapes and managing animal companions comes as natural as the memorised Summon Natures ally list.

At the other end of the spectrum i have seen a lot of really sucky druids, who mainly hung back and threw little beads of flame.

Yeah, your optimization floor is really a function of 2 things. How easy is it for a well intentioned person to screw up the class by accident and how hard is it to fix.

Fighter. Super low op floor. Might try to make a florentine duelist or an Arthurian knight. When faced like feats like TWF and dodge or shield feats and improved disarm he may not know why he can't beat relevant enemies. If you handed me the character sheet I couldn't fix it immediately. I couldn't fix it in 8 hours. I could improve it with a shopping run but I couldn't make it do it's job without weeks of retraining.

Barbarian. Higher op floor. The iconic barbarians are big dudes with big weapons, and anyone reading the first level class features will likely see rage and focus on strength. I might need a shopping run for ways to beat common problems, but I could probably make it workable. But if it is built badly enough, like fighter, it takes weeks of retraining to fix.

Wizard. Easy to screw up but easy to fix. If you handed me a wizard sheet I might expect to see junk like magic missile, but even a spell list picked at random from cool sounding stuff is likely to have gems on it. I couldn't fix it immediately, but I could radically improve it in 8 hours. A week and a shopping trip for some scrolls and it would be T1. Even in the hands of an inexperienced player, is likely to improve over time. All it takes is for him to cast polymorph one time, realize that every fight can be improved by turning the fighter into a giant, and you are probably already at T2 on the strength of polymorph alone. If you just assume a player who stops memorizing spells that don't work and continues memorizing ones that do, natural selection will work you up in Tier.

Druid. Hard to screw up, easy to fix. The companions that sound cool aren't necessarily the best but don't suck. Wolf seems most common and is decent. Natural Spell is the only core Druid feat, so inexperienced players often take it, and it is amazing. Hand me any Druid over 4th level and it is immediately a solid T3, regardless of spells picked, solely on the virtue of summon natures ally and wildshape. With 8 hours rest it's a solid T1. Given a week to dismiss and resummon a companion and it is probably at 80-90% of top strength, even with bad gear and feats.

[Cosi]

Uh? Cleric has tons upon tons of more than solid PRCs. Quick listing off the top of my head:

Yup. Also, Ruby Knight Vindicator isn't really that great. You give up a lot for some extra swift actions which, while not trivial, are probably not worth the lost casting (particularly during the build's progression).

[emeraldstreak]

Wizards has many wonderful prestige classes...

For some reason I've never rated high "has wonderful prestige classes" or "has wonderful multiclassing" as particularly compelling arguments in favor of a class.

[Cosi]

For some reason I've never rated high "has wonderful prestige classes" or "has wonderful multiclassing" as particularly compelling arguments in favor of a class.

But the fact that the Druid can take Natural Spell is totally part of the class's power, as is the Artificer's ability to craft items, or the Erudite's ability to suck spells out of other people's brains.

Oh, wait, those things are exactly as much a part of their respective classes as the Wizard's ability to become an Incantatrix.

[Gnaeus]

But the fact that the Druid can take Natural Spell is totally part of the class's power, as is the Artificer's ability to craft items, or the Erudite's ability to suck spells out of other people's brains.

Oh, wait, those things are exactly as much a part of their respective classes as the Wizard's ability to become an Incantatrix.

The fact that Druid has natural spell in core is relevant to the optimization floor. The fact that there is a broken PRC in magic of faerun really does almost nothing for wizard. Since any player with the time, inclination and skill to find it, recognize it and take it could already have smashed the game as hard as he wanted in core. That's less like a Druid with natural spell than it is like a Druid with aberration wild shape.

[emeraldstreak]

Not taking levels in Class X will never convince me Class X is good.

[Cosi]

The fact that Druid has natural spell in core is relevant to the optimization floor. The fact that there is a broken PRC in magic of faerun really does almost nothing for wizard. Since any player with the time, inclination and skill to find it, recognize it and take it could already have smashed the game as hard as he wanted in core. That's less like a Druid with natural spell than it is like a Druid with aberration wild shape.

But that's not the argument streak was making, is it? He wasn't saying "I don't care if a class has wonderful non-core options", he was saying "I don't care if a class has wonderful PrCs." What's more, I think talking about Tier One as a unit necessitates talking about an "all sources" game, because Artificer is setting-specific and Erudite is a variant of a variant.

[Nifft]

What's more, I think talking about Tier One as a unit necessitates talking about an "all sources" game, because Artificer is setting-specific

That's nonsense.

The T1 classes are T1 even if you restrict them to Core.

Artificer is T1 even if he can't build anything outside of Core -- even if he's cut out of his setting, and nothing else from Eberron exists in the game, he's still a T1.

Furthermore, on a more general note, I can add one element from a setting without "all sources" being necessitated. I can allow Warmage but not Wu-Jen, for example. Oh look, that's generally the default. Many people can (and do) exactly that: cherry-pick.

[Gnaeus]

But that's not the argument streak was making, is it? He wasn't saying "I don't care if a class has wonderful non-core options", he was saying "I don't care if a class has wonderful PrCs." What's more, I think talking about Tier One as a unit necessitates talking about an "all sources" game, because Artificer is setting-specific and Erudite is a variant of a variant.

It's less about that for me than it is about what happens at different optimization levels. Incantrix is irrelevant because anyone with incantrix has long since had planar binding. And anyone with planar binding already has all RAW power desired. The DM banning polymorph and planar binding will probably ban incantrix also. And we are well past the level of play at which common game assumptions like PCs entering a dungeon and fighting enemies are really relevant. And we are also at an optimization level at which all T1s are more or less equal since we all have ways to copy each other's tricks. An incantrix with 400 bound outsiders isn't significantly stronger than a wizard with 400 bound outsiders.

[Cosi]

Nifft may want to consider that sentences end where periods are, not where they optimally support the point he wants to make.


It's less about that for me than it is about what happens at different optimization levels. Incantrix is irrelevant because anyone with incantrix has long since had planar binding. And anyone with planar binding already has all RAW power desired. The DM banning polymorph and planar binding will probably ban incantrix also. And we are well past the level of play at which common game assumptions like PCs entering a dungeon and fighting enemies are really relevant. And we are also at an optimization level at which all T1s are more or less equal since we all have ways to copy each other's tricks. An incantrix with 400 bound outsiders isn't significantly stronger than a wizard with 400 bound outsiders.

I suppose that's a reasonable perspective, but as you point out, it doesn't lend itself terribly well to identifying a "worst Tier One". Also, I strongly suspect that a DM which bans Incantatrix is also going to ban "if I play a variant from a web article of a variant from an appendix in an expansion to an optional subsystem, and I find characters who can already cast the spells I want, and I get a favorable ruling on a spell from a different splat, I can cast every spell whenever I want", which means the Erudite is going to be little better than the Psion.

[Nifft]

What's more, I think talking about Tier One as a unit necessitates talking about an "all sources" game, because Artificer is setting-specific


What's more, I think talking about Tier One as a unit necessitates talking about an "all sources" game, because Artificer is setting-specific and Erudite is a variant of a variant.


Nifft may want to consider that sentences end where periods are, not where they optimally support the point he wants to make.

Do tell us what the difference might be.

[Gnaeus]

I suppose that's a reasonable perspective, but as you point out, it doesn't lend itself terribly well to identifying a "worst Tier One". Also, I strongly suspect that a DM which bans Incantatrix is also going to ban "if I play a variant from a web article of a variant from an appendix in an expansion to an optional subsystem, and I find characters who can already cast the spells I want, and I get a favorable ruling on a spell from a different splat, I can cast every spell whenever I want", which means the Erudite is going to be little better than the Psion.

I think there are worst T1s at lower optimization levels. I think Druid likely wins low op, merging to a place where wizard or maybe artificer wins at mid-high op and level. But I think by the time planar shepherd and incantrix are floating around we are way past the game as designed, living in a tippyverse adjacent suburb in which only full casters matter and the DM can only challenge any of them with encounters specifically designed to kill that particular character. And the houserules necessary to play aren't something we can evaluate with RAW. We would have to look at the ban-list or delve deeply into the player agreements as to what is or isn't broken. And I doubt any 2 of us would be in 100% agreement there.

That second part is totally legit. I also don't expect to see STP erudites in working games. As you say, it's high op by definition. So either the universe just breaks or there is something else in play keeping the game functioning and we can't evaluate without reading the houserules.