Magic Armor AND Shield?

[Avista]

For every wizard (and spellcasting class) guide that I've read, they all state you should only pick one of these two spells, depending on the build and playstyle. But I just listened in to my group arguing that it's better to have both spells, prepared and ready for use. Magic armor for the usual travel, and shield for the reaction.

My group tends to play gritty campaigns, where at least half the party ends up downed at some point. How viable do you see both magic armor and shield to be for a wizard? I would have thought killing the boss quickly is a more efficient use of spell slots than spending another readied spell for a shield.

(Mobs also seem particularly keen on trying to bypass the tanks and target the backline of bow-wielders and spell casters)

[Cikomyr]

You should get Mage Armor, Shield and a Shield :-D

[viaFAMILIAR]

Shield is a level 1 slot and stays effective at higher tiers of play, a perfect use for those slots by then. Mage Armor is staple for that base AC, but it could be argued Mirror Image is better. Magic Initiate for a free casting of MA? Perhaps for shorter campaigns. Or, if provided with higher level slots, just switch out MA for Shield and hope on MI working. Why not all three? No concentration's involved. It really depends if a player wants to put their caster in melee. Maybe Storm Sorcerer?

[opaopajr]

Shield is a great conditional spell to have prepared; it can save your bacon outright. But it can be a prep and slot sink if you are not strategic or tactical. :smalltongue: At lower levels it is better to learn how to coordinate with your party more so as to conserve resources.

Also, and I cannot stress this enough, too many people need to learn how distance is a form of "armor," let alone how to use cover and concealment, and the almighty value of Dodge. :smallamused:

(Mage Armor AC 13+DEX +5 Shield) is great for that killer blow that comes out of nowhere. It's even better with cover AND dodge! :smallcool: But what's best is conserving all that for when you need it, and that comes from negotiating teamwork. :smallsmile:

[Rara1212]

Mage Armour is effectivity +3 AC for wizards or other casters without access to armor.
So I'd argue Mage Armor is better the more battles you fight.

If you just have a random encounter while traveling and can dump all you spell-slots Shield works better, but otherwise I'd go for Mage Armor

[Dork_Forge]

They really do different things, mage armor is a long duration spell intended to be an armor substitute where as shield is an in the moment defensive counter measure. They work together, if you don't have any armor proficiency and you don't use mage armor, you're going to have to use shield a lot more and the ceiling for your AC will be very low. Conversely using mage armor helps you when you can't use shield and let's shield block higher rolled attacks.

I've always gone for both unless I was playing a Draconic Sorcerer.

[OverLordOcelot]

They're not really related to each other. Mage armor gives you a decent base AC if you don't have armor proficiency from multiclassing or racial ability (Hobgoblin wizards often take medium armor proficiency at 4th level). It's a basic piece of the toolkit, and the only real reason not to have it is if you have or plan to get armor proficiency. Shield is a big burst of AC when you get hit, it and absorb elements (if you're using Xanathar's Guide) are basic defensive spells you should basically always have, especially in a dangerous campaign. I don't know what guides are recommending that you only take one, I would definitely have either both or shield and non magical armor.

[CharacterIV]

I can't see myself playing a Sorcerer or Wizard WITHOUT Shield.

If I were a Sorcerer I might skimp on Mage Armor to preserve known slots.

[sithlordnergal]

Shield has always been a requirement for all of my Wizards and Sorcerers. The +5 to AC is a huge boost, and it's great for defending myself. That said, I never take Mage Armor, instead I take a single level of Fighter.

[Angelmaker]

My group tends to play gritty campaigns, where at least half the party ends up downed at some point.

Sounds like you should prepare water breathing more often then ;)

[Magicspook]

You should get Mage Armor, Shield and a Shield :-D

My wizard actually had this for a couple of sessions (his stats are really bad so I kept getting instakilled by everything that even looked my way) but then after a couple of sessions I found out there was such a thing as shield proficiency, which wizards don't have...

[Arkhios]

Honestly? As a squishy wizard who values their precious few hit points, I'd take any and all chances for a higher Armor Class, no questions asked. If it means you're down to spamming cantrips for the first few levels, then so be it. Cantrips are great spells in 5th edition.

[Tanarii]

(Mobs also seem particularly keen on trying to bypass the tanks and target the backline of bow-wielders and spell casters)You probably need both in that case. And to spend ASIs on Dex. Or if you want to save the spells known/prepared slots and your Dex started at 12 or less, spend 2 ASIs on Lightly and Moderately armored Feats.

The best defense for Wizards and Sorceress is not getting targeted by attacks against AC, so for example in my campaign with large groups of Pcs and Henchmen, they often don't take either spell. But sounds like that's not an option for you.

[Man_Over_Game]

I'd only recommend Mage Armor if you can afford the level 1 spell slot/preparation for it. Truth is, a single level into Fighter (if you can take the multiclass), will get you Medium Armor and +1 AC on top of that for your Fighting Style, on top of getting you +2 more HP than you would as a Wizard. Take a second level for another +2 HP, and you have access to Action Surge to burst out some solid spells in the first round of combat.

[Samayu]

I would have thought killing the boss quickly is a more efficient use of spell slots than spending another readied spell for a shield.


I agree. You need to be judicious with using Shield. I see a lot of people using it every time they get hit. Try to spend it only when you know the hit is going to be particularly nasty. Otherwise, use your slots to take out the BBG.

As to whether you should prepare both Mage Armor and Shield... I don't know. Depends on what else you want to run and how much space you have.

[OverLordOcelot]

I'd only recommend Mage Armor if you can afford the level 1 spell slot/preparation for it. Truth is, a single level into Fighter (if you can take the multiclass), will get you Medium Armor and +1 AC on top of that for your Fighting Style, on top of getting you +2 more HP than you would as a Wizard. Take a second level for another +2 HP, and you have access to Action Surge to burst out some solid spells in the first round of combat.

I don't get the logic here - dropping two levels into fighter means you'll always have two fewer prepared spells, 1-2 fewer spell slots, and one level less of maximum spells than a straight wizard. Fighter/wizard is a useful combo if you want to drop significant spell power for more burst and survivability, but it's not the way to go if giving up one first level slot per day and one prepared spell on mage armor bothers you. Also note that a level of cleric gets you medium armor, access to additional cantrips and handy spells, domain abilities, and doesn't cost you any spell slots, it costs you a lot less casting ability.

[Man_Over_Game]

I don't get the logic here - dropping two levels into fighter means you'll always have two fewer prepared spells, 1-2 fewer spell slots, and one level less of maximum spells than a straight wizard. Fighter/wizard is a useful combo if you want to drop significant spell power for more burst and survivability, but it's not the way to go if giving up one first level slot per day and one prepared spell on mage armor bothers you. Also note that a level of cleric gets you medium armor, access to additional cantrips and handy spells, domain abilities, and doesn't cost you any spell slots, it costs you a lot less casting ability.

The mention on Cleric is fair, if you can afford it. You'll need to have the Wisdom for it, on top of the stat you'll need for the armor. It's also 1 less HP than the Fighter, which might be a big deal if your Constitution isn't very high (especially considering you put a 13 into Wisdom).

Or, thinking about it, you could take the best of both worlds. One level into Hexblade, just requires a 13 into Charisma (just as expensive as Cleric), but it grants you a Short Rest spell slot that can be reused for Shield, while also giving you a feature that lets you heal HP back and doesn't get in the way of your spellcasting.

[Avista]

I plan to go full wizard; I just need to survive the campaign long enough to get to levels of BlastyMcBlastFace. I initially took mage armor and I can copy shield from our other wizard; that won't be a problem. I'm more concerned about spell slot economy, since I'm meant to be a glass cannon for the group.

[OverLordOcelot]

I plan to go full wizard; I just need to survive the campaign long enough to get to levels of BlastyMcBlastFace. I initially took mage armor and I can copy shield from our other wizard; that won't be a problem. I'm more concerned about spell slot economy, since I'm meant to be a glass cannon for the group.

Being a glass cannon is a bad plan unless the DM goes really easy on you and doesn't ever target you. In general it's far better to be able to survive and keep blasting than to conserve first level slots but be out of the fight. At really low levels your first level spells are a major part of your combat ability, but once you hit levels 5+ they're no big deal - for general purpose damage, tossing out a 2d10 firebolt (3d10 in T3) is often about as good as a first level spell, and for major damage (and control effects) you'll want to use your higher level spells. By the time you're in the 7-9 range, you'll probably have several unused slots at the end of an adventure anyway, and if you do run short it's usually the big spells. And you don't have to actually shield unless you want to. You end up paying a very small cost to keep the cannon firing when you need it.

[Tawmis]

For every wizard (and spellcasting class) guide that I've read, they all state you should only pick one of these two spells, depending on the build and playstyle. But I just listened in to my group arguing that it's better to have both spells, prepared and ready for use. Magic armor for the usual travel, and shield for the reaction.

My group tends to play gritty campaigns, where at least half the party ends up downed at some point. How viable do you see both magic armor and shield to be for a wizard? I would have thought killing the boss quickly is a more efficient use of spell slots than spending another readied spell for a shield.

(Mobs also seem particularly keen on trying to bypass the tanks and target the backline of bow-wielders and spell casters)

If your DM is throwing things at you that downs half the party (I am assuming knocking them to 0, forcing Death Saves) - then anything that would increase your chances of not being hit, seems like a good option to go with. You're of no use to the party that expects you to be a "glass cannon" if the DM has targeted you, in hopes of taking your character down.

Out of curiosity - when the DM is targeting the back row (casters and other range folk) - is s/he doing it with all creatures? I can see it with intelligent creatures (kobolds, goblins, etc.) because they might recognize what a wizard is - especially after seeing the caster fling one spell. They might realize to take down the heavy hitters in the back. But I'd say normal creatures (wolves, bears, etc.) wouldn't really know to attack wizards and ranged - if there's already someone in their face (fighters, barbarians, etc.) hitting them in the face.

[dragoeniex]

The mention on Cleric is fair, if you can afford it. You'll need to have the Wisdom for it, on top of the stat you'll need for the armor. It's also 1 less HP than the Fighter, which might be a big deal if your Constitution isn't very high (especially considering you put a 13 into Wisdom).

Or, thinking about it, you could take the best of both worlds. One level into Hexblade, just requires a 13 into Charisma (just as expensive as Cleric), but it grants you a Short Rest spell slot that can be reused for Shield, while also giving you a feature that lets you heal HP back and doesn't get in the way of your spellcasting.

Well, the slot progression is just as stunted if you multiclass Warlock as it is if you go Fighter; Warlocks do not count as full casters and are factored in separately for spell resources. Wisdom is a better buy-in since it adds to your stronger save proficiency. Clerics also have access to enough first-level healing to probably make up for the fact you aren't doing a 1/rest max negligible self-heal. Trust me; I'm saying this as a Bard who dipped 1 lv Hexblade alongside a Wizard who dipped 1 lv Cleric. Both of us get a lot of mileage from Shield, and he's far tankier in terms of AC (if not HP) for it.

That said, a MC isn't necessary to be effective here. And if we're sticking to strictly the wizard class...




I plan to go full wizard; I just need to survive the campaign long enough to get to levels of BlastyMcBlastFace. I initially took mage armor and I can copy shield from our other wizard; that won't be a problem. I'm more concerned about spell slot economy, since I'm meant to be a glass cannon for the group.

The roughest waste of spell economy is when you can't contribute anything because you're down or dead. One round of conscious, mass destruction is likely to be outpaced by two or three rounds of still-conscious, moderate destruction.

It can be hard to justify prepping two spells that could possibly burn both your slots for the day on defense, but survivability is a big deal early game. I'd say prep at least one of the two- both wouldn't hurt. Try to lead with Mage Armor and the previously-offered advice on team cooperation and positioning yourself. Then you've got one to burn for more fun uses unless the grim reaper visits early.

Mage Armor may fall off later on if you pick up special items that help your AC, or if you're feeling gutsy. But these are both good spells that stack nicely together.

A wizard who keeps her concentration by avoiding hits is a formidable one indeed.

[OverLordOcelot]

Clerics also have access to enough first-level healing to probably make up for the fact you aren't doing a 1/rest max negligible self-heal. Trust me; I'm saying this as a Bard who dipped 1 lv Hexblade alongside a Wizard who dipped 1 lv Cleric.

Yes, first level cleric gives you several nice options - bless is a powerful buff for your allies, healing word lets you get people back on their feet, inflict wounds and guiding bolt are generally effective than wizard damage spells at first level, and knowledge cleric (my favorite) lets you get identify without burning a known spell for it and get expertise on Arcana, which you're probably going to be rolling a lot. And I agree, warlock is worse than fighter in general since it tanks your spell progression just as bad but doesn't give you the option of action surge novaing or constitution save proficiency. The one or two extra first level spells per short rest seems good at low levels but you fairly rapidly find yourself with more low level spell slots than you'll use anyway, unlike a paladin or EK.

[Zetakya]

What race are you playing as? Mountain Dwarf gets Medium Armour Proficiency (& +2 CON).

[Fable Wright]

Mage Armor and Shield:

Take both. The usual plan for my Wizards is to take Shield at first level, and Mage Armor at second—supplemented judiciously by being away from the frontlines; hiding in an illusory barrel; going prone vs archers; hiding behind a wall or window against ranged attacks; taking the Dodge action; and otherwise trying my best to avoid ever needing to use either.

D6 HP is not gonna go far.