Optimization On Multiclassing for Wizards (Mini-Guide) [Archive]

LudicSavant

2020-09-09, 05:37 PM

Just something I wrote as a reply to another thread that folks found useful.

Color Key:
:D Optimal Option.
:) Good Option.
:| Okay Option.
:( Relatively Weak Option.

Multiclassing for Wizards

Cleric
Cleric is a good dip for Wizards because it gives you armor + shield proficiency, an expanded spell list, 3 extra spells prepared (with a 14 Wis), 3 extra cantrips known (including the particularly valuable Guidance), and a subclass ability, all while keeping your slot progression intact.

Forge Domain 1: A +1 to AC, or a +1 to attack and damage for an ally. Great deal, unless you're in a game where you expect everyone's going to have +1 armor, shields, and weapons sooner rather than later (because it doesn't stack).

Life Domain 1 + Mark of Healing: This one is really good if you're playing a Mark of Healing Halfling. It's what makes your Aura of Vitality heal 120 hit points and all that good stuff. Other Cleric choices aren't even close for a Jorasco halfling. For a non-Jorasco halfling, it can still boost some things (Life Transference, Vampiric Touch, Healing Word, Cure Wounds, perhaps most notably Soul Cage), but... eh.

War 1: The only Wizard subclass that might care about this extra attack is the Bladesinger, and they can't benefit from the armor or shield.

Arcana 1: If you felt 8 cantrips wasn't enough, this'll get you two more. There really are enough good cantrips on the Wizard list that this isn't just a waste.

Order 1: Every single spell you cast that targets an ally allows them to get a reaction attack. Remember that yes, contrary to a common misconception, characters in an AoE count as targets by both RAW and dev-stated RAI and yes, if you're an Evoker Sculpting around allies, it still triggers this.

Nature 1: If you want extra cantrips known, Arcana is better. There's just nothing you really want on the Druid list.

Death 1: Toll the Dead is one of the best attack cantrips, and this'll let you twin it at will. What's not to love?

Grave 1: Not good for you. Even if you wanted to be a healer Wizard, this isn't even close to being as good as the Life Cleric dip.

Knowledge 1: 2 extra proficiencies, and Expertise in them, which officially gives you as much proficiency and Expertise as a Rogue... before you cast Guidance and just completely blow them out of the water. That, plus the fact that you're maxing your Int, means this makes you very good indeed at whichever knowledge checks you pick. Don't forget all the things that those skills do; for example, Arcana can be used to detect and disarm magic traps.

Tempest 2: 2-3 modest reactions isn't worthless, but it's not worth a whole lot either. If you're taking this, it's probably because at some point you want to take Tempest level 2 and start maximizing some lightning/thunder damage. An exception to the usual rule where you don't really want to consider Cleric 2.

Trickery 1: Basically allows you to give someone Advantage on stealth all day every day. That's pretty handy if anyone in your party (or even just your familiar) likes to use Stealth.

Light 1: The ability to inflict Disadvantage on attacks as a reaction 2-3 times a day (depending on your Wisdom) might seem attractive, but it makes a smaller mathematical difference than you might think. Since it has to be declared before you know if the attack hits or misses, there's a high mathematical chance of it being wasted. The chance of the enemy missing you without Disadvantage, plus the chance of the enemy hitting you despite it, adds up to the chance of the ability being wasted. Turns out that this doesn't get much better or worse regardless of your AC, since a high AC makes them more likely to miss regardless, while a low one makes them more likely hit regardless. It also can only affect a single attack, and means you can't use a heavier duty reaction like Shield or Counterspell later in the turn if needed.

Artificer 1
So on the one hand, Artificer gives you Medium Armor+Shield, Con save proficiency, full slot progression, 2 extra cantrips (one of which is Guidance), and 5 spells prepared from the Artificer spell list (assuming we max Int). And a small ribbon.

On the other hand, we've got a problem: Artificers must have their tools in hand when casting Artificer spells, even if they multiclass. Unlike other classes, you can't just use a component pouch. If your DM's a stickler for components this can be a pain in the rear, unless you have a workaround like Warcaster or Ruby of the War Mage or something.

So, Artificer 1 is thin on class features, so its value is going to come down to that Artificer Spell List it's adding (and how much you like Con saves over Wis; personally I like getting both and usually want the +1 Con from the half-feat more). All but 4 of those spells are already on the Wizard list, but at least you're getting extra prep slots for them. Of those 4, the only really notable one is Int-based Sanctuary, which is pretty good on a class that has so many non-damaging ways to contribute to combat. But there's still the component issue.

Overall I lean towards Cleric or Hexblade being the better Wizard dip, but this is still quite good if you can deal with the focus issue.

Fighter 2
As far as 1-level armor dips go, Fighter is perhaps the least attractive. Oh sure, you can get the Defense style for another +1 AC, but you could have gotten +1 AC from Forge Cleric. And sure, you get Second Wind, but let's face it, that's worth less than slot progression.

So if you go Fighter 1, it's probably because you eventually plan to take Fighter 2. Unlike Quicken Spell, Action Surge will let you cast more than one spell per turn, making for some mean novas, but at the cost of setting you a full 2 levels behind on your casting progression. I usually would rather have the spells, but it's by no means a bad route, especially if you have few encounters per short/long rest.

You can take it at Tier 4 as a sort of alternate capstone, or you can do something like Fighter 1 / Wizard 5 / Fighter 2 / Wizard X.

Hexblade 1
The Hexblade is a fantastic dip for almost everything, and the Wizard is certainly no exception. It'll get you two spells known / always prepared (I usually recommend Armor of Agathys + Shield. Why Shield even though Wizards already know it? Because I'd rather prepare an extra Wizard spell every day than know another Warlock spell), a regenerating level 1 spell slot, medium armor + shield, Wis/Cha proficiency (basically meaning you have a decent bonus in all 3 mental saves), and Hexblade's Curse (which is really good for Wizard damage combos, especially for Evokers).

Please don't take Eldritch Blast when you dip Warlock as a Wizard. I know you've heard that it's a good cantrip from internet memes, but it's only a good cantrip if you take the invocations and max Cha, neither of which is in any way remotely worth it for you. Good things are only good in their appropriate synergistic contexts. Otherwise they suck.

Hexblade 2 + Abjurer
Getting the second level of Abjurer will allow you to freely regenerate your Arcane Ward with Armor of Shadows, along with getting you an extra regenerating spell slot for Shields and another Invocation.

Rogue 2
Cunning Action is attractive, but if you want that playstyle you can just play a Goblin and do it as a single classed Wizard. Better to have a race without an Int bonus than take 2 levels of Rogue.

Sorcerer 3
A dash of Metamagic isn't good enough to be worth deviating 3 levels from your Wizard progression, IMHO. Quicken is similarly expensive to using spells that give you good bonus actions. Twinned Banish might seem fancy but you could have done multi-target disables for similar resource investment (and you'll never be able to use it on a spell higher than 3rd level because of your SP limit). Careful is frustratingly finicky with what it actually works with. Empower is efficient, but not efficient enough to deal with the fact that you're upcasting spells rather than knowing the higher level ones. The only thing that's difficult to replicate here is Subtle and you might even be surprised on the tricks available on that front.

Seriously, just having a Simulacrum is better than most of the things that Metamagic does. So why delay getting one? Even if you're considering taking this at 17, after you've got your 9th level spells known, you're still looking at giving up Spell Mastery, a feat, and Signature Spells, not to mention carrying around that Cha 13 investment for the rest of your career, all for what, a little bit of metamagic at only level 20?

Paladin 2:
I suppose I could see this going with a Bladesinger, but the armor proficiency won't stack with Bladesong and you'll need 13 Str and Cha to qualify. And other Wizards are unlikely to find the smiting particularly valuable.

Ranger 1:
Pretty much anything else is a better way to get medium armor + shield proficiency.

Druid 1:
It's like an inferior Cleric dip with a 'fun' discussion about metal armor attached.

Monk 1:
No, Unarmored Defense doesn't stack with any of your stuff and Martial Arts is worthless.

Barbarian 1:
You're joking, right? You can already get Resistance to, or outright 'nope,' many attacks, but you want Rage? You want to slow down your casting progression and invest in 13 Strength in order to get something that turns off your ability to cast spells while active?

Bard 1:
Just doesn't offer as much from a dip as other casting classes do.

Staying Single Class
There's an immense amount of value in an uninterrupted Wizard casting progression, and you should think carefully about whether it's worth it to ever deviate from that. New players often dramatically underestimate just how good Wizard spell progression is, simply because they don't know how to use even a tiny fraction of its tools to their potential. You can grow in power immensely as a Wizard just by adjusting your mindset and thinking a bit more about how various spells can be put to their best uses. It really is a class where one skilled player can legitimately defeat an entire party of other players using an identical build. If you ever feel like you're underperforming as a Wizard, the first thing you should be examining is your tactics.

Some races even will even give you the benefit of medium armor + shield while single classed. Hobgoblin is the best at this, since it lets you start 17 Con / 16 Int (and bump the Con to 18 when you get Resilient), and gives you the really excellent Save Face ability (which is worth nearly as much as the Lucky feat on its own), and you can just grab Moderately Armored with your first ASI. Variant Human is second best at this; simply by taking Lightly Armored + Moderately Armored it can get +2 Dex / +1 Int / +1 Con / Medium and Shield by the same point that Hobgoblin would get +2 Con / +1 Int / +1 Dex / Medium and Shield. Mountain Dwarf is actually relatively poor at this, since it's an ASI behind due to lack of Int bonus, and has no shield proficiency -- by the time it catches up to the VHuman in Intelligence, the VHuman will have Medium Armor and Shield. Githyanki is fairly similar to Mountain Dwarf, but without the movement speed penalty, and trading +2 Con for +1 Int, and Poison Resistance for some nifty spells (including a componentless Misty Step).

If you're a race that gets armor proficiency, there's less reason to multiclass.

Some races that don't grant you armor can confer significant defensive benefits as well. Warforged and Simic Hybrid won't give you armor, but will give you a straight AC boost which is enough to make your AC about as good as a Mountain Dwarf's would be anyway (and can stack with armor if you get it from multiclassing). Mark of Warding Dwarf won't give you armor either, but gives you a suite of potent abilities which synergizes especially well with the Abjurer (though it's great with other classes too). Svirfneblin will let you endlessly regenerate an Arcane Ward with the Svirfneblin Magic feat. Yuan-Ti will get you Magic Resistance and Immunity to a common damage type and condition, and its Cha/Int statline, normally considered antisynergistic, is just gravy for a Hexblade/Wizard combo. Winged Feral Tieflings can fly. Goblins can just Hide as a bonus action after casting every turn, in addition to some other nifty benefits. Mark of Healing Halflings combined with a Life Cleric 1 dip transform Wizards into one of the best healers in the game.

cutlery

2020-09-09, 06:10 PM

I was hoping for a discussion of 6+ level multiclasses :(

True, they won’t be as good at wizarding, but some combos work better than others, and there are breakpoints to think of (ek7/ab13 vs ek11/abj9; at11/bs9 vs at18/bs2, etc).

Yakmala

2020-09-09, 06:40 PM

1 level of Knowledge Cleric is my "go-to" dip for Wizards. The Medium Armor and shields is nice, but I especially like, on a high intelligence character like a Wizard, being able to get expertise in skills like Arcana and History and then support that with Guidance. It really helps in turning the Wizard into the know-it-all they were meant to be.

Frogreaver

2020-09-09, 10:41 PM

A few additions:

Dragon Sorcerer 1:
Con Save proficiency
13+ Dex AC fix
Extra cantrips
Extra spells

Rogue 1:
Expertise - Great Boost to investigation and arcana
*If you start rogue you get a little extra hp and an additional skill. Typically better as a mid game dip (once proficiency bonus is up to +3 or +4.

Fighter 1:
Heavy Armor + Shields
Defensive Fighting Style
Con Saves
2nd wind for self healing a bit
It's really hard to pass up 21 AC and con saves on a wizard

Mastermind Rogue 3:
Wizards don't regularly use bonus actions. This gives you bonus action help. Also pairs very well with bladesinger.
Rogue movement skills are nice. (Bonus action hide can be amazing)
Expertise is very nice too

Fighter 5 / wizard X works really well. Shadow Blade does a great job of powering the builds damage.

LudicSavant

2020-09-10, 04:29 PM

Thanks for the feedback. My thoughts on these:

I was hoping for a discussion of 6+ level multiclasses :(

True, they won’t be as good at wizarding, but some combos work better than others, and there are breakpoints to think of (ek7/ab13 vs ek11/abj9; at11/bs9 vs at18/bs2, etc).

I guess I personally mentally categorize those more as "Eldritch Knight builds" and "Arcane Trickster builds" than "Wizard builds." But there's definitely stuff to discuss there. Perhaps something I'll cover in the future.

Fighter 1:
Heavy Armor + Shields
Defensive Fighting Style
Con Saves
2nd wind for self healing a bit
It's really hard to pass up 21 AC and con saves on a wizard

I talked about this one a bit under the 'Fighter 2' section. It's a good dip, though I generally would take Cleric 1 or Hexblade 1 instead if I wasn't planning to eventually get Fighter 2. It is however easier to qualify for than they are.

I'd rate it Green-Blue. Edit: By that I mean I think it's Blue if you're planning to go to 2, and lower otherwise.

Dragon Sorcerer 1:
Con Save proficiency
13+ Dex AC fix
Extra cantrips
Extra spells
I can't see myself rating this as anything above Orange -- it grants fewer 'extra spells' than other dips, and those dips grant armor/shield. 13+Dex AC, especially with an extra 13 Cha requirement on your statline (so it's harder to afford secondary/tertiary stats), is only worth approx. 1x L1 spell slot spent on Mage Armor. Which just leaves Con proficiency (which you can get from Artificer or Fighter).

I don't regard Constitution save proficiency as that much better than Wisdom save proficiency (and I regard both better than Dex proficiency). I regard Int and Cha saves as better than Strength. There's some productive discussion of how good each save is in this thread (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?612120-Hierarchy-of-Saving-Throws).

- I'll often want to take Resilient in whichever of Con or Wis I don't have proficiency in, and Res(Con) is better than Res(Wis). That's because the +1 Con (hit points) is worth more than the +1 Wis (you're not gonna have more Perception than your familiar regardless).
- If you fail a Wisdom, Intelligence, or Charisma save, it often means losing your concentration, your actions, and possibly even turning on your team and spending all your resources going nova on them. Constitution saves are somewhat more common, but the consequences are generally less severe.
- Con saves aren't the only way to protect your Concentration. The better you get at playing a Wizard, the harder it is to successfully target you with attacks in the first place, particularly as an armored Wizard. And the less your game will be thrown off on the occasion that you do fail one. Basically the better I got at the class, the less I needed to make Con saves in the first place (even though the encounters kept getting Deadlier relative to my level).
- If you're multiclassing it slows down your ASIs -- which means you get Resilient (or any other feats) a little later.

Constitution save proficiency is nice if it's on the way to something else you want, but I wouldn't multiclass just to get it -- it takes quite a lot to be worth slowing down access to higher level spells, IMHO.

Rogue 1:
Expertise - Great Boost to investigation and arcana
*If you start rogue you get a little extra hp and an additional skill. Typically better as a mid game dip (once proficiency bonus is up to +3 or +4.
That sounds like Knowledge Cleric 1 without the spell progression or armor. I wouldn't take it unless I was planning to get to at least Rogue 2.

Mastermind Rogue 3:
Wizards don't regularly use bonus actions. This gives you bonus action help. Also pairs very well with bladesinger.
Rogue movement skills are nice. (Bonus action hide can be amazing)

While Wizards may not use their bonus action every single round, they still have a lot of very good ones -- more and more as the game goes on. And any Wizard/Rogue is going to have an additional competitive bonus action on top of that: Cunning Action.

Where is this gonna fit into a build? Take the 3 Rogue levels at the start and you aren't getting an ASI until 7 or 3rd level spells until 8. Take them at 17 and you're trading Spell Mastery, Signature Spells, and an ASI for this.

I just am not really seeing the allure of Mastermind here.

Fighter 5 / wizard X works really well. Shadow Blade does a great job of powering the builds damage.
At that point why not be an EK 7+ or a Bladesinger?

Galactkaktus

2020-09-10, 04:39 PM

This so much this the wizard spell list is just that strong. Hence why this is my favorite way to distribute my levels when i play a wizard.

Staying Single Class
[/SIZE][/SIZE]There's an immense amount of value in an uninterrupted Wizard casting progression, and you should think carefully about whether it's worth it to ever deviate from that. New players often dramatically underestimate just how good Wizard spell progression is, simply because they don't know how to use even a tiny fraction of its tools to their potential. You can grow in power immensely as a Wizard just by adjusting your mindset and thinking a bit more about how various spells can be put to their best uses. It really is a class where one skilled player can legitimately defeat an entire party of other players using an identical build. If you ever feel like you're underperforming as a Wizard, the first thing you should be examining is your tactics.

Miele

2020-09-10, 05:47 PM

Excellent points. I recently made a nuclear wizard, but due to "table" reasons, I decided with my DM friend to change it, so I converted it to a straight wizard. I miss terribly the 2 extra cantrips, I love having a ton of them, mostly because I consider Mage Hand and Prestidigitation mandatory (what kind of a wizard uses flint and steel or washes his clothes, or use a ladder to pick a book from the top shelf? Let's not talk about crap and cold meals. Come on...) and I'm highly addicted to Shape Water and Mold Earth, because they are fun.

Can you live without an attack cantrip at level 7? It's certainly possible. MM is still there, so is Fireball, everything else is utility or control. Maybe at 8 I'll do something about it, who knows? :smallwink:
I have only martials in my group, damage is hardly a problem (healing is, but that's another story).

I consider Artificer an excellent choice (I play a gnome, so double that because of the stereotypical tinkering gnome): you can get Mage Hand and Guidance from that list and in a group like mine, Faerie Fire and Cure Wounds would be really useful.

LudicSavant

2020-09-10, 06:23 PM

Frogreaver

2020-09-10, 08:47 PM

I talked about this one a bit under the 'Fighter 2' section. It's a good dip, though I generally would take Cleric 1 or Hexblade 1 instead if I wasn't planning to eventually get Fighter 2. It is however easier to qualify for than they are.

I'd rate it Green-Blue.

Judging from your stance on saves - the only major benefit this multiclass is giving you is 21 AC. If all it really takes to get to blue green is 21 AC that tells me where your priorities are. Those aren't the same priorities I share.

I can't see myself rating this as anything above Orange -- it grants fewer 'extra spells' than other dips, and those dips grant armor/shield. 13+Dex AC, especially with an extra 13 Cha requirement on your statline (so it's harder to afford secondary/tertiary stats), is only worth approx. 1x L1 spell slot spent on Mage Armor. Which just leaves Con proficiency (which you can get from Artificer or Fighter).

The only major difference in this and the hexblade/cleric dip is the amount of AC achieved. Another great example of how a +3/4 AC difference is all that is required to go from orange to blue.

I don't regard Constitution save proficiency as that much better than Wisdom save proficiency (and I regard both better than Dex proficiency). I regard Int and Cha saves as better than Strength. There's some productive discussion of how good each save is in this thread (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?612120-Hierarchy-of-Saving-Throws).

And that is the crux of why you don't value these two multiclasses. The general consensus AFAIK is that Con save proficiency is much better than wisdom for a caster.

- I'll often want to take Resilient in whichever of Con or Wis I don't have proficiency in, and Res(Con) is better than Res(Wis). That's because the +1 Con (hit points) is worth more than the +1 Wis (you're not gonna have more Perception than your familiar regardless).

I'm not seeing this argument. It's not about hp vs perception. It's that it's a fake bonus to hp / perception. Typically to make your stats work you will be sitting your stat down by 1 so resilient will boost it to where it would have been without it - essentially granting you a few points in tertiary ASI's.

***There are probably a few builds that can get 15 con and then actually boost their hp with resilient con.

- If you fail a Wisdom, Intelligence, or Charisma save, it often means losing your concentration, your actions, and possibly even turning on your team and spending all your resources going nova on them. Constitution saves are somewhat more common, but the consequences are generally less severe.

The most common Wisdom Saves of those are fear and charm effects. Those effects barely impact a caster at all. Failing a Wisdom save can be nasty. Losing concentration on say a hypnotic pattern can be nasty as well and is much more likely to occur.

- Con saves aren't the only way to protect your Concentration. The better you get at playing a Wizard, the harder it is to successfully target you with attacks in the first place, particularly as an armored Wizard. And the less your game will be thrown off on the occasion that you do fail one. Basically the better I got at the class, the less I needed to make Con saves in the first place (even though the encounters kept getting Deadlier relative to my level).

That's one reason I wouldn't value extremely AC nearly as much as you do. Positioning and clever play is often enough to prevent many attacks upon you. If your not being attacked much then high AC is a bit redundant. However, you can still be crit or be in an AOE attack and in those instances the con saves really matter.

- If you're multiclassing it slows down your ASIs -- which means you get Resilient (or any other feats) a little later.

Constitution save proficiency is nice if it's on the way to something else you want, but I wouldn't multiclass just to get it -- it takes quite a lot to be worth slowing down access to higher level spells, IMHO.

The trend I'm seeing is that the only thing you really value in a wizard multiclass is high AC.

That sounds like Knowledge Cleric 1 without the spell progression or armor. I wouldn't take it unless I was planning to get to at least Rogue 2.

Alas, no investigation which is maybe the more important of those 2 skills.

While Wizards may not use their bonus action every single round, they still have a lot of very good ones -- more and more as the game goes on. And any Wizard/Rogue is going to have an additional competitive bonus action on top of that: Cunning Action.

Where is this gonna fit into a build? Take the 3 Rogue levels at the start and you aren't getting an ASI until 7 or 3rd level spells until 8. Take them at 17 and you're trading Spell Mastery, Signature Spells, and an ASI for this.

I just am not really seeing the allure of Mastermind here.

If your concern is that the mastermind isn't better than a single classed wizard I think we can stop talking multiclassing wizards, because i've yet to see any that is actually better. I've seen a few relatively comparable wizard multiclasses - but nothing flat out better.

The Allure of mastermind is that you can pair it with bladesinger. Essentially giving you some extra sneak attack damage while also being able to grant an ally advantage. Throw in expertise and cunning action and I don't see how this isn't a solid dip.

At that point why not be an EK 7+ or a Bladesinger?

Faster progression to higher level wizard spells (better utility) while also having superiority dice for precision attack, trip attack and riposte which offer tons of damage for a 3d8+mod+2 damage weapon.

LudicSavant

2020-09-11, 02:37 AM

If all it really takes to get to blue green is 21 AC that tells me where your priorities are.

So you think that something with 15 AC and Con saves should be Green, but when I say something with 21 AC and Con saves is green (blue if you're going into Action Surge), you have a problem? :smalltongue:

The only major difference in this and the hexblade/cleric dip is the amount of AC achieved.

No, that is not the only major difference between a Hexblade or Cleric dip and a Sorcerer 1 dip.

Dragon Sorc increases spells prepped by 1. Cleric increases it by quadruple that.

Dragon Sorc has nothing of note on its list that a Wizard doesn't already have access to. Cleric gets stuff like Bless and Guidance and Healing Word and domain picks and more.

The clerics that I rated above orange (e.g. what you apparently believe Sorc 1 deserves) are also granting some other major benefit too, like twinning all your TtDs or giving you as many skill proficiencies and Expertise as a Rogue.

Your Sorcerer dip is doing none of these things, AND has a significantly lower AC, and you apparently want it to get the same rating pretty much on the back of Con proficiency and saving a single Mage Armor slot. I'm sorry but that's just not good enough to make you one of the best Wizard dips in the game.

The Hexblade difference is even bigger, since it has features that are key to some of the strongest builds in the entire game, like the Nuclear Wizard or Curse/Ret Abjurer.

The general consensus AFAIK No, there is not a general consensus that Con saves are so much better than Wis that they make a Sorcerer 1 dip as good as a Cleric or Hexblade dip.

In fact, pretty much every time it comes up on the forum people will argue about whether Wis or Con saves are better (see for instance how many people rate Wisdom as the best save, or tied with Con, or very close to Con in this thread (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24504856&postcount=16)). I think Con saves are a little better, but not by enough that it single-handedly justifies a top multiclass rating, especially when you're making other significant tradeoffs (see below). That's just... no. You can get your Con proficiency from Fighter, Artificer, or just being single classed and taking Res(Con). And their additional benefits will make your Concentration far sturdier than the Sorc 1 dip's.

I'm not seeing this argument. It's not about hp vs perception. It's that it's a fake bonus to hp / perception. Typically to make your stats work you will be sitting your stat down by 1 so resilient will boost it to where it would have been without it - essentially granting you a few points in tertiary ASI's.

Let's see how this 'fake hp bonus' hypothesis holds up for your Dragon Sorcerer suggestion, shall we?

Say you want to have your Dragon Sorcerer dip, and you have a +2 primary / +1 secondary race. You can't afford 16 Con / Int / Dex and 13 Cha, so you have to sacrifice something.

Even just 16 Con / 16 Int / 14 Dex / 13 Cha is still too expensive, costing 28/27 points. You still have to sacrifice something. Guess we're going down to 14 Con / 16 Int / 14 Dex / 13 Cha.

Meanwhile let's look at Mr. Cleric over here. He can afford 14 Dex / 15 Con / 16 Int / 13 Wis, then bump with Res(Con) for a very much not fake HP advantage.

Meanwhile let's look at Mr. Single Class Wizard over here. He can go 16 Dex / 15 Con / 16 Int / 10 Wis, and bump up to 16 Con via Res too. He could even afford to go VHuman and start 16/16/16 with Con proficiency. Which incidentally means he has 16 AC with Mage Armor to the Dragon Sorc's 15, in addition to the HP advantage and faster spell progression.

The trend I'm seeing is that the only thing you really value in a wizard multiclass is high AC.

If that were true, I wouldn’t have rated Ranger and some of the Cleric dips red.

In order to get a blue rating you need to be bringing something to the table that makes it worth considering comparable to a single-classed Wizard.

You seem to admit that your suggestions don't meet the criteria but seem to think they are entitled to that rating anyways... somehow.

If your concern is that the mastermind isn't better than a single classed wizard I think we can stop talking multiclassing wizards, because i've yet to see any that is actually better. I've seen a few relatively comparable wizard multiclasses - but nothing flat out better.

My concern was that it’s not better than Rogue 2.

Also, it's ironic that you say this -- you've seen a few relatively comparable Wizard multiclasses, but nothing flat out better. Yep, that's why Single Classed Wizard and the top Wizard multiclasses have the same rating. If you don't think it's one of those 'comparable Wizard multiclasses' you shouldn't be arguing for it to be Blue.

Miele

2020-09-11, 02:44 AM

What are your favorite uses of Shape Water and Mold Earth? :smallsmile:

In our current campaign, stranded on an island very far from civilization (X1 module from BECMI, The Isle of Dread), it was mostly a matter of survival, given that we're without divine spellcasters. So I filtered water (that we then had to purify by boiling it), excavating trenches for a defensible camp, I crumbled earth on some small cave entrances that were home to a primitive (stinky) race of humanoids to scare them away and make them leave the place, I made also lollipops with prestidigitation (*cough* can't be always doing only useful things, right?).

When we had more time, I mixed earth, water and driftwood together with large leaves and made a 3 rooms house surrounded by a moat.

Upon reaching level 7, at the end of our last session, I picked Fabricate as one of my spells. It's about time I started working in constructions, am I right? Dig up the terrain and build wooden houses!

diplomancer

2020-09-11, 03:11 AM

On the saves thing. It may be campaign dependent, but I think most of the Wis targeting abilities start appearing regularly around late tier 2. That means that even though you may WANT both, you probably want Con first.
Balancing that a bit, of course, is the fact that before late tier 2 the proficiency bonus is useful, but not that big.

LudicSavant

2020-09-11, 06:07 AM

As a general principle, large bumps in AC are better at protecting your Concentration than Constitution proficiency at low tiers.

Like it is ~2-11x harder (based on enemy attack bonus/defensive spells used/etc) to break a 21 base AC Wizard's Concentration with <20 damage attacks than a 15 base AC / Con proficient Wizard's, if they have have the same Constitution score (which isn't even a safe assumption because that Sorc dip is a MAD lad). And by higher tiers you should just have Resilient anyways, at which point I'd rather have the +1 Con than +1 Wisdom from the half-feat.

Yes, that Con proficiency will help you out against things that aren't attacks, but not on the order of 2-11x. It's more like 1.4-1.6x. So you're a little less vulnerable to losing Concentration to things like Fireball in exchange for being a little more vulnerable to losing Concentration (and burning your slots on allies) to, say, a Cambion's charm and a lot more vulnerable to losing Concentration (and your HP) to attack rolls.

If you're multiclassing Sorcerer just for Con save proficiency then that's just not a great deal, especially since you could be getting that Con save proficiency from something like Artificer or Fighter instead.

In our current campaign, stranded on an island very far from civilization (X1 module from BECMI, The Isle of Dread), it was mostly a matter of survival, given that we're without divine spellcasters. So I filtered water (that we then had to purify by boiling it), excavating trenches for a defensible camp, I crumbled earth on some small cave entrances that were home to a primitive (stinky) race of humanoids to scare them away and make them leave the place, I made also lollipops with prestidigitation (*cough* can't be always doing only useful things, right?).

When we had more time, I mixed earth, water and driftwood together with large leaves and made a 3 rooms house surrounded by a moat.

Upon reaching level 7, at the end of our last session, I picked Fabricate as one of my spells. It's about time I started working in constructions, am I right? Dig up the terrain and build wooden houses!

Cool! :smallsmile:

Frogreaver

2020-09-11, 07:52 AM

So you think that something with 15 AC and Con saves should be Green, but when I say something with 21 AC and Con saves is green (blue if you're going into Action Surge), you have a problem? :smalltongue:

No problem if you had actually said that ;) You said Fighter 1 was green-blue. I have no problem taking your clarification to be that you meant Fighter 1 was green and Fighter 2 was blue. Which does change the analysis somewhat.

No, that is not the only major difference between a Hexblade or Cleric dip and a Sorcerer 1 dip.

I disagree, but you didn't tell me what features you felt were substantial enough to consider.

Really?

Dragon Sorc increases spells prepped by 1. Cleric increases it by quadruple that.

Dragon Sorc has nothing of note on its list that a Wizard doesn't already have access to. Cleric gets stuff like Bless and Guidance and Healing Word and domain picks and more.

A 13 Wis Knowledge Cleric 1 can prep 2 spells and 2 from domain. Which would be triple that not quadruple. Still sounds good, except that the spells from the domain list aren't spells that are beneficial to have prepped. You get Command (nearly always a waste of a slot with 13 wis). You get identify which is a spell a wizard might have taken but would not need to have prepped. Essentially you get to take bless and healing word while the sorcerer takes shield and absorb elements.

But since shield and absorb elements actually frees the Wizard from taking and prepping those spells he can instead prep useful higher level spells in their place. Early game having the best level 1 cleric spells is great. By level 5 I'm not sure Bless and Healing word actually compare to potentially being able to additionally prep fly and dispel magic.

The clerics that I rated above orange (e.g. what you apparently believe Sorc 1 deserves) are also granting some other major benefit too, like twinning all your TtDs or giving you as many skill proficiencies and Expertise as a Rogue.

I notice alot of your points are based on quantity instead of looking at the quality of what is granted. Knowledge skills are typically some of the worst to have expertise in and that's all the knowledge cleric can get expertise in.

Your Sorcerer dip is doing none of these things, AND has a significantly lower AC, and you apparently want it to get the same rating pretty much on the back of Con proficiency and saving a single Mage Armor slot. I'm sorry but that's just not good enough to make you one of the best Wizard dips in the game.

I'm still amazed here. I would have expected green. I mean if it instead got heavy armor and shields would you be rating it blue?

The Hexblade difference is even bigger, since it has features that are key to some of the strongest builds in the entire game, like the Nuclear Wizard or Curse/Ret Abjurer.

Doesn't apply to a level 1 hexblade, which you rated as blue...

No, there is not a general consensus that Con saves are so much better than Wis that they make a Sorcerer 1 dip as good as a Cleric or Hexblade dip.

You added a bunch of qualifiers that weren't what I said. The general consensus is that on casters con saves tend to be more important than Wis saves.

In fact, pretty much every time it comes up on the forum people will argue about whether Wis or Con saves are better (see for instance how many people rate Wisdom as the best save, or tied with Con, or very close to Con in this thread (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24504856&postcount=16)). I think Con saves are a little better, but not by enough that it single-handedly justifies a top multiclass rating, especially when you're making other significant tradeoffs (see below). That's just... no. You can get your Con proficiency from Fighter, Artificer, or just being single classed and taking Res(Con). And their additional benefits will make your Concentration far sturdier than the Sorc 1 dip's.

The fighter doesn't get additional spells known/prepped. He doesn't get additional cantrips. He doesn't get normal wizard spell slot progression. The only thing he has over the sorcerer is +4/5 AC.

I would rate wisdom saves more important on non-casters. I would rate con saves more important on casters. Late game, say sometime in tier 3 - wisdom saves likely become more important on casters. The reason that question asked the way you are asking it doesn't get a consensus is because different game perspectives.

Let's see how this 'fake hp bonus' hypothesis holds up for your Dragon Sorcerer suggestion, shall we?

Say you want to have your Dragon Sorcerer dip, and you have a +2 primary / +1 secondary race. You can't afford 16 Con / Int / Dex and 13 Cha, so you have to sacrifice something.

Even just 16 Con / 16 Int / 14 Dex / 13 Cha is still too expensive, costing 28/27 points. You still have to sacrifice something. Guess we're going down to 14 Con / 16 Int / 14 Dex / 13 Cha.

Meanwhile let's look at Mr. Cleric over here. He can afford 14 Dex / 15 Con / 16 Int / 13 Wis, then bump with Res(Con) for a very much not fake HP advantage.

Meanwhile let's look at Mr. Single Class Wizard over here. He can go 16 Dex / 15 Con / 16 Int / 10 Wis, and bump up to 16 Con via Res too. He could even afford to go VHuman and start 16/16/16 with Con proficiency. Which incidentally means he has 16 AC with Mage Armor to the Dragon Sorc's 15, in addition to the HP advantage and faster spell progression.

I looked at a rock gnome. +2 Int/+1 con racials.

The array for a cleric would look something like: 15/9/14/16/13/8. I don't see how you can get your arrays for any of the multiclass heavy armor clerics to have a 15 in con.

Now if you drop to medium armor your array would be: 9/14/15/16/13/8. This is the instance you can hit that 15 con mark.

In order to get a blue rating you need to be bringing something to the table that makes it worth considering comparable to a single-classed Wizard.

You seem to admit that your suggestions don't meet the criteria but seem to think they are entitled to that rating anyways... somehow.

If single classed wizard is your baseline, I'd argue none of the mutliclasses match it. I'm not arguing sorcerer should be blue but it definitely shouldn't be orange.

My concern was that itÂ’s not better than Rogue 2.

Why? It brings something unique to the table. Compared to a Rogue 2 it adds consistent action economy. It adds a little more at will damage on bladesingers. Is it better than single classed wizard? No. But neither is Rogue 2. Neither is anything IMO.

Lyracian

2020-09-11, 11:36 AM

Cleric
Cleric is a good dip for Wizards because it gives you armor + shield proficiency, an expanded spell list, 3 extra spells prepared (with a 14 Wis), 3 extra cantrips known (including the particularly valuable Guidance), and a subclass ability, all while keeping your slot progression intact.

Forge Domain 1: A +1 to AC, or a +1 to attack and damage for an ally. Great deal, unless you're in a game where you expect everyone's going to have +1 armor, shields, and weapons sooner rather than later (because it doesn't stack).
I really like Cleric. One point on Forge Domain they cannot enchant Shields. 'Blessing of the Forge' says Weapon or Armour only. The other thing I was going to mention was because of how Cleric Domains work you do not miss out on proficiency or spells if you take this at a later level.

Fighter 2
You can take it at Tier 4 as a sort of alternate capstone, or you can do something like Fighter 1 / Wizard 5 / Fighter 2 / Wizard X.
Even if you delay the second level I would have thought you would want to take your First level as Fighter for the full proficiency?

Staying Single Class[/SIZE][/SIZE]
There's an immense amount of value in an uninterrupted Wizard casting progression, and you should think carefully about whether it's worth it to ever deviate from that.

Pure Wizards do not have to wait that extra level for power! My 'Normal' Human Wizard would get Res (Con) and start with 16/16/14/10/10/8. Maybe 16/16/14/12/8/8/ if I wanted to dump Strength and Charisma. (note clearly not shown in the order I would assign them).

Some races even will even give you the benefit of medium armor + shield while single classed. Hobgoblin is the best at this, since it lets you start 17 Con / 16 Int (and bump the Con to 18 when you get Resilient), and gives you the really excellent Save Face ability (which is worth nearly as much as the Lucky feat on its own), and you can just grab Moderately Armored with your first ASI. Variant Human is second best at this; simply by taking Lightly Armored + Moderately Armored it can get +2 Dex / +1 Int / +1 Con / Medium and Shield by the same point that Hobgoblin would get +2 Con / +1 Int / +1 Dex / Medium and Shield. I am not sure if you are using this as an example or actually suggesting a Wizard spends two ASI's on Getting AC 19 from Half-plate and Shield?

If a standard Dex 16 Wizard spent two ASI's on Dex instead they would have AC 18 with Mage Armour as well as all the other advantages high Dex offers.

But since shield and absorb elements actually frees the Wizard from taking and prepping those spells he can instead prep useful higher level spells in their place. Early game having the best level 1 cleric spells is great. By level 5 I'm not sure Bless and Healing word actually compare to potentially being able to additionally prep fly and dispel magic.
Which is a good point.

On the Sorcerer 1 / Wizard 19 the best I can see for Point Buy would be Half Elf giving us S 8; D 16; C 12; I 16; W 9; Ch14

For me you need the 16 Dex if you are going for Mage Armour rather than Medium Armour. Wisdom of nine means we are all set up for Res(Wis) at a later lavel.

Divine Soul seems a much better pick though for a single level dip. You do not get the free casting of Mage Armour but you can pick from Cleric cantrips (Guidance) have 3, not 2, spells prepared and get an excellent saving throw bonus with 'Favoured by the Gods'. Con Save to Start and the extra skills from the Half-Elf to be the party Face.

Now I certainly would not rate it Blue but I might put it at Green. You are making a clear trade off for having less than 14 Con but there are benefits.

LudicSavant

2020-09-11, 12:02 PM

Even if you delay the second level I would have thought you would want to take your First level as Fighter for the full proficiency?

Yep.

I am not sure if you are using this as an example or actually suggesting a Wizard spends two ASI's on Getting AC 19 from Half-plate and Shield?

It illustrates that Mountain Dwarves are not very good at the thing that people think Mountain Dwarves are good at.

You legitimately can use VHuman to do the Mountain Dwarf's thing better than they can. I'm not saying that that's how you should always or even usually use a VHuman, just pointing out that it's an option.

Which is a good point.

It'd be a much better point if the AC difference wasn't so great that they'd have better defenses even if they never prepared Shield.

Like if number of prepared spells was actually that valuable relative to AC, the Cleric could forego prepping Shield entirely (don't actually do this) and still have better defenses than the Sorc. And then have 3-4 spells prepped like Healing Word etc to match against that Absorb Elements. And of course a good subclass ability.

Divine Soul seems a much better pick though for a single level dip.

I think so as well.

I have no problem taking your clarification to be that you meant Fighter 1 was green and Fighter 2 was blue. Which does change the analysis somewhat.

Okay.

The Hexblade difference is even bigger, since it has features that are key to some of the strongest builds in the entire game, like the Nuclear Wizard or Curse/Ret Abjurer.
Doesn't apply to a level 1 hexblade, which you rated as blue...

Uh, yes it does.

The general consensus is that on casters con saves tend to be more important than Wis saves.

This was, of course, not your original statement.

Your original statement wasn't that the general consensus was Con is better than Wis. It was that the general consensus was that Con proficiency is much better than Wis proficiency, to the extent that it justifies your valuation of the Sorcerer 1 dip.

The only thing he has over the sorcerer is +4/5 AC.
This is untrue.

The Fighter has...

- A notably better stat line, since he's not a MAD lad like your Sorc dip. In fact, your Sorc is such a MAD lad that in order to get 16 Int/Dex and thus have the AC difference only be +4/5, he would need to drop his Constitution to 12 -- essentially putting him at -2 Con saves and -2 hp/level (and -2 hp/hit die on a short rest) relative to the Fighter/Wizard's likely statline.

- 25.5 extra hit points over the course of a standard adventuring day, in addition to any hit point differences created by the MADness. A fair chunk that eases the lower tiers.

And of course they have that large AC bonus which you keep handwaving like it's practically nothing, when it's straight up better than at-will Shield (because it stacks with Shield, and returns on AC scale in a very attractive nonlinear fashion (https://i.postimg.cc/MTvcMjvC/Arcane-Trickster5save-HP.png)).

I don't see how you can get your arrays for any of the multiclass heavy armor clerics to have a 15 in con.

For Cleric,
8 Str / 17 Con / 16 Int is only 18 points on a Warding Dwarf.

For Fighter,
15 Str / 15 Con / 16 Int is only 23 point buy on the very race you mentioned.
16 Str / 15 Con / 16 Int is 27 points on a VHuman.

Lyracian

2020-09-11, 12:05 PM

It'd be a much better point if the AC difference wasn't so great that they'd have better defenses even if they never prepared Shield.

Maybe we are not quite on the same page but clerics are going to start with AC 18 vs the Wizard on AC 16. I would not count two points as a great difference? I think you are talking about once a Cleric/Figher gets to Full Plate and Shield for 20-21 AC? At which point yes it is a permanent shield spell for them. Mostly commenting as I do not think it was clear what you are comparing.

Minor point but

15 Str / 15 Con / 16 Int is only 23 point buy on the very race you mentioned.
16 Str / 15 Con / 16 Int is 27 points on a VHuman.

are not going to work well for a multiclass heavy armor clerics as you need some Wisdom too. They are fine for the Fighter/Wizard though.

LudicSavant

2020-09-11, 12:06 PM

Minor point but

15 Str / 15 Con / 16 Int is only 23 point buy on the very race you mentioned.
16 Str / 15 Con / 16 Int is 27 points on a VHuman.

are not going to work well for a multiclass heavy armor clerics as you need some Wisdom too. They are fine for the Fighter/Wizard though.

You're right. Thanks for that. :smallsmile:

Edit: Edited in that correction.
Edit2:

I think you are talking about once a Cleric/Figher gets to Full Plate and Shield for 20-21 AC? At which point yes it is a permanent shield spell for them.

Yes, I was comparing once they get into their full armor.

Though it's worth noting that the only way that the Dragon Sorc build is going to have 16 base AC with point buy is if they sacrifice Con or Int, due to their MADness.

Frogreaver

2020-09-11, 08:48 PM

I really like Cleric. One point on Forge Domain they cannot enchant Shields. 'Blessing of the Forge' says Weapon or Armour only. The other thing I was going to mention was because of how Cleric Domains work you do not miss out on proficiency or spells if you take this at a later level.

Even if you delay the second level I would have thought you would want to take your First level as Fighter for the full proficiency?

IMO, medium armor still tends to be better. Boosting Dex > Boosting Str. It also only takes 14 dex for medium armor vs 15 str for heavy which allows the other points to more easily be invested toward con and meeting multiclassing req. For example as a rock gnome (or high elf) you can do a 9/14/14/16/14/8. If you wanted to turn one of those 14's to a 15 you would need to drop one of the 14's to a 13.

That's a solid statline for any medium armor class. Quite a bit nicer than the alternative one for heavy armor setups.

On the Sorcerer 1 / Wizard 19 the best I can see for Point Buy would be Half Elf giving us S 8; D 16; C 12; I 16; W 9; Ch14

For me you need the 16 Dex if you are going for Mage Armour rather than Medium Armour. Wisdom of nine means we are all set up for Res(Wis) at a later lavel.

I'd probably have went 8/16/12/16/10/13 but essentially the same. I have no expectation I'll ever reach a point that I'll take resilient Wisdom. Thats level 12 or 13 with most of these builds.

Divine Soul seems a much better pick though for a single level dip. You do not get the free casting of Mage Armour but you can pick from Cleric cantrips (Guidance) have 3, not 2, spells prepared and get an excellent saving throw bonus with 'Favoured by the Gods'. Con Save to Start and the extra skills from the Half-Elf to be the party Face. Now I certainly would not rate it Blue but I might put it at Green. You are making a clear trade off for having less than 14 Con but there are benefits.

I think that mage armor is the most overrated spell ever. There's an extremely high probability that if you cast it that it will not even make 1 attack miss. You have to be attacked 7 times before it on average will make 1 attack miss. And it's not even guaranteed to last the whole adventuring day. You might need to use up to 3 slots on it. Much better early game to use the slots you would have used on mage armor on something else.

That said, I have no issue with divine soul at all. I'd consider it on equal footing with dragon sorc and I'd be happy if they were both rated green.

LudicSavant

2020-09-11, 10:49 PM

The Dragon Sorc 1 dip is closer to the Bard than the Cleric. Light armor prof is roughly comparable to (or in some circumstances, better than) the dragon subclass armor. They both have the same MADness. Bard has twice as many extra spells known (though not quite as nice ones to prep). And they get to toss in a Bardic Inspiration and bonus skill proficiency and a pittance of extra hit points. They're just stuck with Dex/Cha instead of Con/Cha, but we've already established there are much better ways to grab that (like Artificer) so that's hardly owning an optimization niche, which is what's required to even be in the running for Green for me.

In the 'get some extra cantrips and spells prepared' niche I'd recommend something like Arcana or Artificer instead.

I have no expectation I'll ever reach a point that I'll take resilient Wisdom. Thats level 12 or 13 with most of these builds.
:smallconfused:

Lyracian

2020-09-12, 03:05 AM

IMO, medium armor still tends to be better. Boosting Dex > Boosting Str. It also only takes 14 dex for medium armor vs 15 str for heavy which allows the other points to more easily be invested toward con and meeting multiclassing req. For example as a rock gnome (or high elf) you can do a 9/14/14/16/14/8. If you wanted to turn one of those 14's to a 15 you would need to drop one of the 14's to a 13. That's a solid statline for any medium armor class. Quite a bit nicer than the alternative one for heavy armor setups.
I find it amusing how people always bring up that you need high strength for heavy armour. If you have 13 Dex you will have a lower AC in medium armour. If you have 13 Str you can stay in starting Chain mail (giving you the same AC 18 with a Shield as starting characters in Medium Armour and 14 Dex) or just accept having a lower movement speed when you wear Plate.

If your game uses the Eboron book (I do not) there is also now the super powerful Warding Dwarf who is not slowed in Heavy Armour and gets an Int bonus. The other point is that any of these options that give you Heavy Armour proficiency also give you medium armour proficiency allowing you to mix and match as required. You never know what treasures you might find.

I'd probably have went 8/16/12/16/10/13 but essentially the same. I have no expectation I'll ever reach a point that I'll take resilient Wisdom. Thats level 12 or 13 with most of these builds.Level 12-13 is going to be the end of most of the published campaigns so it would be come your capstone for the character.

I think that mage armor is the most overrated spell ever. There's an extremely high probability that if you cast it that it will not even make 1 attack miss. You have to be attacked 7 times before it on average will make 1 attack miss. And it's not even guaranteed to last the whole adventuring day.
This is turning the discussion into how people play the game. If you are ambushed in the night you will not have your armour on. Sure +3 AC is only 15% shift on the d20 however you also have to look at the quantity of attacks that will hit you. With no bonus to the attack roll you are going from 40% hits to 25% hits. If you are willing to throw a Shield spell on top you can negate most of those hits as well.

Frogreaver

2020-09-12, 07:19 AM

I find it amusing how people always bring up that you need high strength for heavy armour. If you have 13 Dex you will have a lower AC in medium armour. If you have 13 Str you can stay in starting Chain mail (giving you the same AC 18 with a Shield as starting characters in Medium Armour and 14 Dex) or just accept having a lower movement speed when you wear Plate.

If your game uses the Eboron book (I do not) there is also now the super powerful Warding Dwarf who is not slowed in Heavy Armour and gets an Int bonus. The other point is that any of these options that give you Heavy Armour proficiency also give you medium armour proficiency allowing you to mix and match as required. You never know what treasures you might find.

Personally I wouldn't use heavy armor without the 15 investment into str. The movement penalty is too big a deal IMO. The alternative of medium armor and dex, with no move speed penalty and all the benefits of dex is simply better IMO.

This is turning the discussion into how people play the game. If you are ambushed in the night you will not have your armour on. Sure +3 AC is only 15% shift on the d20 however you also have to look at the quantity of attacks that will hit you. With no bonus to the attack roll you are going from 40% hits to 25% hits. If you are willing to throw a Shield spell on top you can negate most of those hits as well.

Maybe this will help. I evaluate mage armor so poorly that on a single class Wizard I don't take it. For most of the game there's simply more impactful things to do with my slots. I think talking about which options are better is mostly about how the game is played. I play my wizards such that they position themselves fairly safely. They take relatively few attacks in the first place. Don't get me wrong, 19+ AC is nice on a wizard - but so is 15/16 when it doesn't take spell slots.

Lyracian

2020-09-12, 10:44 AM

Personally I wouldn't use heavy armor without the 15 investment into str. The movement penalty is too big a deal IMO. The alternative of medium armor and dex, with no move speed penalty and all the benefits of dex is simply better IMO.
I used to play a lot of older edition rules where you were just slowed because you were wearing armour so that does not bother me. You can always downgrade to Ring Mail and still get better AC that the Sorcerer and no movement penalty allowing you ignore Strength and Dex if you want.

Vuman Forge Cleric Wizard starting with Res(Con)
Con 16; Int 16; Wis 14; then 10/10/8 for the other three in what ever way I want. You could even go 12/8/8 if I want a positive Dex adjustment.

Blessing of the Forge, Ring Mail & Shield = AC 17. We still have Chain mail for AC 19 should we want it during some parts of the adventure.

Maybe this will help. I evaluate mage armor so poorly that on a single class Wizard I don't take it. For most of the game there's simply more impactful things to do with my slots. I think talking about which options are better is mostly about how the game is played. I play my wizards such that they position themselves fairly safely. They take relatively few attacks in the first place. Don't get me wrong, 19+ AC is nice on a wizard - but so is 15/16 when it doesn't take spell slots.
We clearly play very different games. I find it strange that you value Mage Armour so little but maintain the Draconic Sorcerer is such a good choice for a Wizard multi-class. For me having a single, always on, first level spell does not make it stand out as better than the other Sorcerer origins or Cleric.

MaxWilson

2020-09-12, 11:45 AM

LudicSavant

2020-09-12, 12:02 PM

You can also mitigate the movement penalty via Mobile feat or Longstrider (or Phantom Steed, or Dimension Door, etc.).

Instead of going Dwarf so you can have a permanent -5' speed penalty, go variant human (Mobile) so you can have a fully normal 30' speed plus extra advantages when attacking (e.g. Booming Blade) or Dashing over difficult terrain.

And you still have the option Lyracian mentioned of occasionally putting on Ring Mail instead to have 40' movement instead of 30', when movement speed is more important to you than AC.

Yep. Some folks also take 35 speed races with armor, like Satyr or Mark of Passage human, which has essentially the same effect as being an armored dwarf.

Frogreaver

2020-09-12, 03:46 PM

I used to play a lot of older edition rules where you were just slowed because you were wearing armour so that does not bother me. You can always downgrade to Ring Mail and still get better AC that the Sorcerer and no movement penalty allowing you ignore Strength and Dex if you want.

Vuman Forge Cleric Wizard starting with Res(Con)
Con 16; Int 16; Wis 14; then 10/10/8 for the other three in what ever way I want. You could even go 12/8/8 if I want a positive Dex adjustment.

Blessing of the Forge, Ring Mail & Shield = AC 17. We still have Chain mail for AC 19 should we want it during some parts of the adventure.

That's a solid setup. One that I'm pretty impressed with. Let's compare that build at level 7 to a Dragon Sorcerer build at level 7.

Notables:
Your setup
53hp
17AC
-1 str saves
+1 dex saves
+6 con saves
+5 wis saves
+4 int saves
+2 cha saves
+1 initiative
Cantrips: Guidance, Light, Thaumaturgy, Mage Hand, Toll the dead, Minor Illusion
Notable Spells prepared: Identify, Bless, Healing Word, Detect Magic, Shield, Absorb Elements, Magic Missile, Invisibility, Misty Step, Levitate, Web, Counterspell, Hypnotic Pattern, Fireball

Dragon Sorcerer setup
44hp
15 AC
-1 str saves
+2 dex saves
+5 con saves
+3 wis saves
+4 int saves
+4 cha saves
+2 initiative
Cantrips: Light, Mage Hand, Minor Illusion, Prestidigitation, Firebolt, Toll the Dead, Shocking Grasp
Notable Spells prepared: Shield, Absorb Elements, Magic Missile, Silent Image, Invisibility, Misty Step, Levitate, Web, Counterspell, Hypnotic Pattern, Fireball, Tongues

*Took resilient wisdom for sake of comparison (Of course I think it's a bit wrong for variant human with res con to be considered part of your build in the first place when a good part of the exercise was about the impact of having con saves over wisdom saves).

I'd say your build is more defensive. +9 hp, better saves IMO, +2 ac. But is that actually better than having the extra spells prepared? I'm not sure. Having an extra 3rd level spell prepped is huge (I did tongues, but really any would be good). I guess it boils down to - would you rather be a little better in combat or better out of combat?

We clearly play very different games. I find it strange that you value Mage Armour so little but maintain the Draconic Sorcerer is such a good choice for a Wizard multi-class. For me having a single, always on, first level spell does not make it stand out as better than the other Sorcerer origins or Cleric.

I don't think that's true. Perhaps we just value things slightly differently. My issue with mage armor is that it typically costs a resource you could have used to do something far more important.

MrStabby

2020-09-12, 07:49 PM

Not a contradiction, but a clarrification: death domain cleric can take toll the dead as the wizard cantrip if they want. It remains a wizard cantrip and therefore still uses intelligence rather than wisdom. Not a big deal, but if you want it it frees up a wizard cantrip for something else.

Personally I like the death domain cleric/divine soul sorcerer for this rather than the wizard, but it is a nice little bonus to the multiclass.

MaxWilson

2020-09-12, 07:50 PM

MrStabby

2020-09-12, 08:13 PM

Death domain is for NPCs only though.

Death domain is for whoever the DM allows to play it

Merudo

2020-09-12, 08:28 PM

Not a contradiction, but a clarrification: death domain cleric can take toll the dead as the wizard cantrip if they want. It remains a wizard cantrip and therefore still uses intelligence rather than wisdom.

I'm fairly certain the cantrip uses wisdom (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/163126/if-i-learn-chill-touch-from-the-death-clerics-reaper-ability-does-it-count-as?noredirect=1&lq=1), although it could be read both ways really.

Death domain is for NPCs only though.

A player can choose the Death Domain with the DM's approval.

MrStabby

2020-09-12, 08:31 PM

I'm fairly certain the cantrip uses wisdom (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/163126/if-i-learn-chill-touch-from-the-death-clerics-reaper-ability-does-it-count-as?noredirect=1&lq=1), although it could be read both ways really.

I think everything else explicitly states when there is a shift: nature cleric, arcana cleric bard magical secrets, Warlock tome pact... I don't think a switch is default, I think itneedsto be stated. No erratum I found to suggest otherwise either (2018 was last I checked though).

MaxWilson

2020-09-12, 10:01 PM

A player can choose the Death Domain with the DM's approval.

Well, yes, but a player can also play a mind flayer or a silver dragon with the DM's approval. DM's approval should not be taken for granted--at minimum it's worth calling out in a guide that Villainous Archetypes (Death Domain, Oathbreaker) are intended for NPCs in the same way that Bladesinging is intended for elves and Battleraging is intended for dwarves.

Klorox

2020-09-12, 11:53 PM

Frogreaver

2020-09-13, 12:14 AM

Let me start by saying it would take a lot for me to multiclass a wizard.

They’re my favorite class in the game, and being a level behind half the time (even with only a 1 level dip- and I’d NEVER do more than that unless I had 9th level spells already) on spells is a very bitter pill to swallow.

I just don’t see the real benefit of sorcerer.

Pros:
Saving throws are better
More cantrips
Free mage armor

Cons:
With point buy, instead of an 8 CHA, you have a 13
You’re a spell level behind half the time.
You spend a feat on resilient WIS instead of CON (meaning the saving throw benefit is minimal)

I mean, you’re just better being a wizard, IMHO.

Or, if you’re going to dip out of wizard, so many classes are just better.

I would suggest that none of the multiclass dips listed here are better than just staying wizard.

The comparison point isn’t to full wizard it’s to other multiclass wizard combos.

I mean look at the Hexblade dip that was rated blue. Similar mad issues as the dragon sorc.

Difference is wis saves and 19 ac vs con saves and 15 ac. Also there’s the single short rest recharge level 1 slot full caster spell slot progression. Which ends up being extra slots of the highest level. Also a difference in more higher level wizard spells being prepared for the sorc version and more cantrips.

But if that’s blue then how the heck isn’t the sorcerer at least green?

Klorox

2020-09-13, 12:42 AM

I would suggest that none of the multiclass dips listed here are better than just staying wizard.

The comparison point isn’t to full wizard it’s to other multiclass wizard combos.

I mean look at the Hexblade dip that was rated blue. Similar mad issues as the dragon sorc.

Difference is wis saves and 19 ac vs con saves and 15 ac. Also there’s the single short rest recharge level 1 slot full caster spell slot progression. Which ends up being extra slots of the highest level. Also a difference in more higher level wizard spells being prepared for the sorc version and more cantrips.

But if that’s blue then how the heck isn’t the sorcerer at least green?

Well, I can’t speak for OP, but I have my theories: there’s a big difference between 19 and 15 AC, isn’t there? Think about how many spell slots you’re saving by having to cast the shield spell so many fewer times!

The fact the hexblade gets hexblades curse is worth more than a cantrip also, at least IMHO. I think there’s a reason why that nuclear wizard build is so widely loved, while I’ve never seen a power sorcerer/wizard multiclass.

Frogreaver

2020-09-13, 01:26 AM

Well, I canÂ’t speak for OP, but I have my theories: thereÂ’s a big difference between 19 and 15 AC, isnÂ’t there? Think about how many spell slots youÂ’re saving by having to cast the shield spell so many fewer times!

The fact the hexblade gets hexblades curse is worth more than a cantrip also, at least IMHO. I think thereÂ’s a reason why that nuclear wizard build is so widely loved, while IÂ’ve never seen a power sorcerer/wizard multiclass.

Taking aside the AC difference for a moment, Does the rest of the package for hexblade really outweigh the rest of the package for dragon sorc to any significant degree? I believe the answer there is no. I personally would rate the dragon sorc non-ac abilities as slightly better than the hexblade's non-ac abilities (more higher level slots helps alot there). In which case the whole idea of rating the hexblade blue and the dragon sorc orange is based almost solely on a 4 AC difference.

Skylivedk

2020-09-13, 02:39 AM

Taking aside the AC difference for a moment, Does the rest of the package for hexblade really outweigh the rest of the package for dragon sorc to any significant degree? I believe the answer there is no. I personally would rate the dragon sorc non-ac abilities as slightly better than the hexblade's non-ac abilities (more higher level slots helps alot there). In which case the whole idea of rating the hexblade blue and the dragon sorc orange is based almost solely on a 4 AC difference.
Hexblade's Curse is maybe the best damage enabler in the game. It's hands down better than the rest of entire package of the Sorcerer.

Armour of Agathys is at the same time one of the best retribution damage spells in the game.

I frankly don't see how you can even compare them and be the slightest moment in doubt.

In reality you end up losing two cantrips, since you probably want both saves anyway. For the rest: Hexblade is very strong on a range of builds, and Sorcerer isn't very strong in any niche. Sorcerer 3 might be tempting after level 9 spells, but I honestly don't see the allure early on. It's too expensive for too little early power.

BloodSnake'sCha

2020-09-13, 04:58 AM

One of my players have a real nice multiclass wizard.
He took 2 levels in tempest cleric and all other level at order of the scribe wizard.
An electric fireball is nice and pretty cool when maximize.

LudicSavant

2020-09-13, 06:24 AM

Taking aside the AC difference for a moment, Does the rest of the package for hexblade really outweigh the rest of the package for dragon sorc to any significant degree? I believe the answer there is no. I personally would rate the dragon sorc non-ac abilities as slightly better than the hexblade's non-ac abilities (more higher level slots helps alot there). In which case the whole idea of rating the hexblade blue and the dragon sorc orange is based almost solely on a 4 AC difference.

The package for Hexblade enables some of the strongest Wizard builds in the entire game, period, while the package for Dragon Sorc basically shoots yourself in the foot relative to a normal Wizard or any optimized multiclass build.

You might as well be asking a child to fight Mike Tyson here.

Hexblade's Curse is maybe the best damage enabler in the game. It's hands down better than the rest of entire package of the Sorcerer.

Armour of Agathys is at the same time one of the best retribution damage spells in the game.

I frankly don't see how you can even compare them and be the slightest moment in doubt.

In reality you end up losing two cantrips, since you probably want both saves anyway. For the rest: Hexblade is very strong on a range of builds, and Sorcerer isn't very strong in any niche. Sorcerer 3 might be tempting after level 9 spells, but I honestly don't see the allure early on. It's too expensive for too little early power.

Yep. It's not even close.

Lyracian

2020-09-13, 07:05 AM

That's a solid setup. One that I'm pretty impressed with. Let's compare that build at level 7 to a Dragon Sorcerer build at level 7.
Thank you.

*Took resilient wisdom for sake of comparison (Of course I think it's a bit wrong for variant human with res con to be considered part of your build in the first place when a good part of the exercise was about the impact of having con saves over wisdom saves).
I think we have been talking about having both at some point. We had just not discussed when in detail. You had mentioned it would most likely be level 13 with a Half-Elf Sorcerer.

I'd say your build is more defensive. +9 hp, better saves IMO, +2 ac. But is that actually better than having the extra spells prepared? I'm not sure. Having an extra 3rd level spell prepped is huge (I did tongues, but really any would be good). I guess it boils down to - would you rather be a little better in combat or better out of combat?

I assume you have gone for a Human rather than Half-Elf in order to the Resistance and pump Int with your first ASI? Otherwise the Vuman either has better saves or that extra preparation from higher int.

For out of combat utility I think you are under playing the Cleric spell options. Guidance can be a great help for all those skill checks. Create Water & Purify Food can both be of use depending on the campign. While you are unlikely to want them at level 7 you have also had access to Sanctuary and Shield of Faith at lower levels. In Tier 1 your Cleric DC is only 1 less than your Wizard if you used Sanctuary when negotiating with NPC's such as Bandits. I also found Cure Wounds of use when I was a level 3 character with no actual Level 2 spells to use those slots on (again that will depend on the game).

Overall though yes I think the Cleric offers much better options for our Wizard than Sorcerer does in allowing us to have extra prepared Wizard Spells. While you would require Boots of Striding and Springing or Mithral Armour, we do still have the option of getting AC 21 from plate without further investment in stats which is something the Sorcerer does not.

LudicSavant

2020-09-13, 10:27 AM

Dragon Sorcerer setup
44hp
15 AC
-1 str saves
+2 dex saves
+5 con saves
+3 wis saves
+4 int saves
+4 cha saves
+2 initiative
Cantrips: Light, Mage Hand, Minor Illusion, Prestidigitation, Firebolt, Toll the Dead, Shocking Grasp
Notable Spells prepared: Shield, Absorb Elements, Magic Missile, Silent Image, Invisibility, Misty Step, Levitate, Web, Counterspell, Hypnotic Pattern, Fireball, Tongues

So we can translate that to 44 hp, 15 AC, 8 Str, 14 Dex, 14 Con, 10 Wis, 18 Int, 13 Cha, 7 cantrips, 12 spells prepared, proficiency in Wis, Con, Cha

Now let's take Arcana Cleric with the same race/feat (except it's Res:Con rather than Res:Wis). 46 hp, 19 AC, 8 Str, 14 Dex, 14 Con, 14 Wis, 18 Int, 9 cantrips, 14 spells prepared, proficiency in Wis, Con, Cha.

Total differences to your build:
+2 hp
+4 stackable AC
+2 wisdom mod, -2 charisma mod, which adds up to a better overall statline and saves.
+2 cantrips, including Guidance
+2 spells prepared
+14 level 1 spells known (more if you actually want to optimize and use a Ravnica background)
+1 skill proficiency
+Itemization advantages (e.g. they can use a notably larger percentage of magic items in the book)

It's basically just your build, but markedly better.

As several folks have said now, the Dragon Sorc 1 dip is just not that special.

Frogreaver

2020-09-13, 11:58 AM

The package for Hexblade enables some of the strongest Wizard builds in the entire game, period, while the package for Dragon Sorc basically shoots yourself in the foot relative to a normal Wizard or any optimized multiclass build.

You might as well be asking a child to fight Mike Tyson here.

Yep. It's not even close.

IMO, you are valuing a little extra damage way to highly. More higher level prepped spells and more higher level spell slots is a big boon. That's what the dragon sorc gets that the hexblade doesn't.

So we can translate that to 44 hp, 15 AC, 8 Str, 14 Dex, 14 Con, 10 Wis, 18 Int, 13 Cha, 7 cantrips, 12 spells prepared, proficiency in Wis, Con, Cha

Now let's take Arcana Cleric with the same race/feat (except it's Res:Con rather than Res:Wis). 46 hp, 19 AC, 8 Str, 14 Dex, 14 Con, 14 Wis, 18 Int, 9 cantrips, 14 spells prepared, proficiency in Wis, Con, Cha.

Total differences to your build:
+2 hp
+4 stackable AC
+2 wisdom mod, -2 charisma mod, which adds up to a better overall statline and saves.
+2 cantrips, including Guidance
+2 spells prepared
+14 level 1 spells known (more if you actually want to optimize and use a Ravnica background)
+1 skill proficiency
+Itemization advantages (e.g. they can use a notably larger percentage of magic items in the book)

It's basically just your build, but markedly better.

As several folks have said now, the Dragon Sorc 1 dip is just not that special.

2 things. 1: I placed resilient wisdom on the dragon sorc dip for an easy compare to make a point. It's not the starting feat I would actually choose. 2: Talking about an alternative way to bypass the whole con proficiency > wis proficiency boon of the dragon sorc isn't a very fair comparison because it ties you to a race you might not be wanting to take.

Thank you.

I think we have been talking about having both at some point. We had just not discussed when in detail. You had mentioned it would most likely be level 13 with a Half-Elf Sorcerer.

I assume you have gone for a Human rather than Half-Elf in order to the Resistance and pump Int with your first ASI? Otherwise the Vuman either has better saves or that extra preparation from higher int.

For out of combat utility I think you are under playing the Cleric spell options. Guidance can be a great help for all those skill checks. Create Water & Purify Food can both be of use depending on the campign. While you are unlikely to want them at level 7 you have also had access to Sanctuary and Shield of Faith at lower levels. In Tier 1 your Cleric DC is only 1 less than your Wizard if you used Sanctuary when negotiating with NPC's such as Bandits. I also found Cure Wounds of use when I was a level 3 character with no actual Level 2 spells to use those slots on (again that will depend on the game).

Overall though yes I think the Cleric offers much better options for our Wizard than Sorcerer does in allowing us to have extra prepared Wizard Spells. While you would require Boots of Striding and Springing or Mithral Armour, we do still have the option of getting AC 21 from plate without further investment in stats which is something the Sorcerer does not.

Guidance is very easy for other characters to either have or obtain. If you have any cleric or druid or divine soul or tomelock in the party then the party already has the cantrip. There's a decent chance a party will have one of those classes and if they do then having it on a wizard is pretty redundant.

If you want to argue that the cleric extra prepped spells in tier 1 are better I will concede that. But come tier 2 I think having access to more higher level prepped wizard spells is better.

Lyracian

2020-09-13, 02:13 PM

Guidance is very easy for other characters to either have or obtain. If you have any cleric or druid or divine soul or tomelock in the party then the party already has the cantrip. There's a decent chance a party will have one of those classes and if they do then having it on a wizard is pretty redundant.
Equally when the rest of the party are Bard, Paladin, Barbarian and Rogue you are the only person with Guidance. I have been in plenty of low level games where I am the only Cleric or we were relying in the Paladin for healing.

If you want to argue that the cleric extra prepped spells in tier 1 are better I will concede that. But come tier 2 I think having access to more higher level prepped wizard spells is better.If I really felt the need for extra versatility in Tier 2 I would happily drop one of the lower level spells. Also, unless I was quite lucky with loot, at Level 7 (Cleric 1 / Wizard 6) I am only going to know 4 Third Level spells one of which is going to be a Ritual.

You said adding Res (Wis) was only for comparison so what would your Race/Build be for the Sorcerer-Wizard? What do you see as the optimal setup?
For me the Sorcerer-Wizard starts Half-Elf and spends ASI on +4 Int and then Res (Wis) at level 13. That means you are going all the way through Tier 1 and 2 without proficiency in Wisdom saves and with a lower AC. To me that is not worth the extra prepared spell.

I have said my build for the Heavy Armour Cleric-Wizard is Vuman with Res (Con). I can pump int to 20 by level 9 and then have free choice at 13 of the next feat. Lucky, Alert, +2 Con or even Mobility if I really wanted to have 30' movement and Heavy armour. To me the disadvantage of Human is spending a cantrip on Light. Hardly a big trade off for getting that starting feat.

Skylivedk

2020-09-13, 02:26 PM

IMO, you are valuing a little extra damage way to highly. More higher level prepped spells and more higher level spell slots is a big boon. That's what the dragon sorc gets that the hexblade doesn't.

2 things. 1: I placed resilient wisdom on the dragon sorc dip for an easy compare to make a point. It's not the starting feat I would actually choose. 2: Talking about an alternative way to bypass the whole con proficiency > wis proficiency boon of the dragon sorc isn't a very fair comparison because it ties you to a race you might not be wanting to take.

Guidance is very easy for other characters to either have or obtain. If you have any cleric or druid or divine soul or tomelock in the party then the party already has the cantrip. There's a decent chance a party will have one of those classes and if they do then having it on a wizard is pretty redundant.

If you want to argue that the cleric extra prepped spells in tier 1 are better I will concede that. But come tier 2 I think having access to more higher level prepped wizard spells is better.

A) it's a stretch to say that Healing Word ever falls off.

B) it's not a little damage. It's all damage rolls. It's key in the Nuclear Wizard and a bunch of other builds.

C) Protection from Good and Evil, Bless and Detect Magic retain value.

D) you're basically only getting Absorb Elements from this deal since the 4 AC lost are close enough to being your Shield spell (relying on having your reaction free and burning slots is very very expensive for 1 AC).

So we can translate that to 44 hp, 15 AC, 8 Str, 14 Dex, 14 Con, 10 Wis, 18 Int, 13 Cha, 7 cantrips, 12 spells prepared, proficiency in Wis, Con, Cha

Now let's take Arcana Cleric with the same race/feat (except it's Res:Con rather than Res:Wis). 46 hp, 19 AC, 8 Str, 14 Dex, 14 Con, 14 Wis, 18 Int, 9 cantrips, 14 spells prepared, proficiency in Wis, Con, Cha.

Total differences to your build:
+2 hp
+4 stackable AC
+2 wisdom mod, -2 charisma mod, which adds up to a better overall statline and saves.
+2 cantrips, including Guidance
+2 spells prepared
+14 level 1 spells known (more if you actually want to optimize and use a Ravnica background)
+1 skill proficiency
+Itemization advantages (e.g. they can use a notably larger percentage of magic items in the book)

It's basically just your build, but markedly better.

As several folks have said now, the Dragon Sorc 1 dip is just not that special.

Thanks. You've now cut the inferiority of the Sorc 1 build in cardboard and bend it in neon.

Satori01

2020-09-13, 05:45 PM

B) it's not a little damage. It's all damage rolls. It's key in the Nuclear Wizard and a bunch of other builds.

The 'Nuclear Wizard' from what I have read, stems from a fallacious reading of page 196 in the PHB. Upcasting Magic Missile and sending all the magic darts does not mean one can add their INT modifier and Hexblade Curse damage to each Missile.

Some Hexblade players have attempted to argue that by RAW, the damage from Hexblade curse should apply to each individual roll of a d6, when a Hexblade attacks with a greatsword or maul.

That said, in tier 4, the Hexblade's Curse is adding 1 point less then the average damage of a Flame Tongue per hit to the unlucky target.

Flame Tongues are positively, badass, so this is not an insignificant add.

LudicSavant

2020-09-13, 06:09 PM

Thanks. You've now cut the inferiority of the Sorc 1 build in cardboard and bend it in neon.

https://forums.giantitp.com/images/sand/icons/icon_thumbsup.png

Upcasting Magic Missile and sending all the magic darts does not mean one can add their INT modifier and Hexblade Curse damage to each Missile.

Yes, actually, it does. (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47140/how-does-the-evocation-wizards-empowered-evocation-feature-work-with-the-magic)

You can rule otherwise if you don't like it, but that's how it works both by explicit RAW and by dev-stated by RAI.

Also, the Nuclear Wizard is still an extremely strong build even if you don't use that ruling. So it's kind of a moot point.

Some Hexblade players have attempted to argue that by RAW, the damage from Hexblade curse should apply to each individual roll of a d6, when a Hexblade attacks with a greatsword or maul.

These hypothetical Hexblade players would be wrong, and have nothing whatsoever to do with the Nuclear Wizard or anything else being discussed in this thread, so I'd appreciate if you didn't derail it.

Frogreaver

2020-09-13, 06:27 PM

The 'Nuclear Wizard' from what I have read, stems from a fallacious reading of page 196 in the PHB. Upcasting Magic Missile and sending all the magic darts does not mean one can add their INT modifier and Hexblade Curse damage to each Missile.

I'm inbetween on whether it should work by RAW. But even assuming it does a level 10 character using that tactic can shoot 7+6+6 magic missile darts in a 3 round fight (using a single level 5 and two level 4 slots). At 14 charisma that will be 104.5 damage.

Using a single slot on animate objects does 97.5 damage (vs 19 AC) in the same 3 round fight (and only takes your bonus action on subsequent turns)

Some Hexblade players have attempted to argue that by RAW, the damage from Hexblade curse should apply to each individual roll of a d6, when a Hexblade attacks with a greatsword or maul.

Yea, that's silly.

That said, in tier 4, the Hexblade's Curse is adding 1 point less then the average damage of a Flame Tongue per hit to the unlucky target.

Flame Tongues are positively, badass, so this is not an insignificant add.

I mean if someone is willing to max both int and cha then sure. But maxing cha just for hexblade's curse has some pretty big tradeoffs at that point. I'm not sure that the little extra damage doing so would add really makes up for the lack of con/hp and feats that a wizard not focusing on maxing cha would benefit from.

Flame Tongues are badass, but they are badass because you attack nearly every turn and make multiple attacks nearly every turn.

LudicSavant

2020-09-13, 06:32 PM

I mean if someone is willing to max both int and cha then sure. But maxing cha just for hexblade's curse has some pretty big tradeoffs at that point.

Its damage scales with your Proficiency, not your Charisma. :smallsigh:

Frogreaver

2020-09-13, 06:35 PM

https://forums.giantitp.com/images/sand/icons/icon_thumbsup.png

Yes, actually, it does. (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47140/how-does-the-evocation-wizards-empowered-evocation-feature-work-with-the-magic)

You can rule otherwise if you don't like it, but that's how it works both by explicit RAW and by dev-stated by RAI.

Also, the Nuclear Wizard is still an extremely strong build even if you don't use that ruling. So it's kind of a moot point.

JC has stated that the actual sage advice rulings are the only official rules clarifications. Is this clarification in there?

Assuming this works, the only part of a nuclear wizard that we are missing out on is this +2 damage per missile. Build is still mostly in tact without the hexblade part, at least as far as I can tell?

Its damage scales with your Proficiency, not your Charisma. :smallsigh:

LOL, such a noob mistake!

That changes things considerably!

Satori01

2020-09-13, 08:36 PM

[i
Yes, actually, it does. (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47140/how-does-the-evocation-wizards-empowered-evocation-feature-work-with-the-magic)

You can rule otherwise if you don't like it, but that's how it works both by explicit RAW and by dev-stated by RAI., so I'd appreciate if you didn't derail it.

I'm not trying to derail the thread, but every poster except myself, has stated that multi-classing the Wizard is non-optimized...yourself included.

By all means please return to the discussion of 1 level of Arcana cleric vs a 1 level dip of Dragon Sorcerer...to channel my inner Burt Bacharach:

"What the world needs now, is 1600 posts on either a 1 level dip of cleric or dragon sorcerer "....
.....on second thought, this doesn't really trip off the tongue does it? :)

Per the PHB, pg 196:
A spell tells you which dice to roll for damage and whether to add any modifiers.
If a spell or other effect deals damage to more than one target at the same time, roll the damage once for all of them. For example, when a wizard casts fireball or a cleric casts flame strike, the spell's damage is rolled once for all creatures caught in the blast.

Does the above describe a Magic Missile spell with all missiles striking a single target?
It does not.

Each missile, from Magic Missile has a separate damage roll. Empowered Evocation allows you to add you INT modifier to one damage roll of any wizard evocation spell you cast.

To have Magic Missile qualify like a fireball for a single damage roll, you have to target multiple targets, negating the desired effect by Empowered Evocation, namely having it apply multiple times.

Hexblade's Curse, of course does apply to each missile.
That is all I will say...out of respect for my fellow posters.

Frogreaver know the parable of the Flame Tongue- whomever wields the Flame Tongue has the highest DPR.

Hexblade's Curse is a mini-Flame Tongue for spells. ;)

LudicSavant

2020-09-13, 08:44 PM

*snip*

Please do not edit quotes of my posts to say something different than what they say.

Frogreaver

2020-09-13, 09:01 PM

Please do not edit quotes of my posts to say something different than what they say.

I'm not seeing where this occurred?

LudicSavant

2020-09-13, 10:32 PM

I'm not seeing where this occurred?

His edit:
'You can rule otherwise if you don't like it, but that's how it works both by explicit RAW and by dev-stated by RAI., so I'd appreciate if you didn't derail it.'

Original (with underlines added):

You can rule otherwise if you don't like it, but that's how it works both by explicit RAW and by dev-stated by RAI.

Also, the Nuclear Wizard is still an extremely strong build even if you don't use that ruling. So it's kind of a moot point.

*snip*
These hypothetical Hexblade players would be wrong, and have nothing whatsoever to do with the Nuclear Wizard or anything else being discussed in this thread, so I'd appreciate if you didn't derail it.

As you can see, he edited two different sentences responding to two different topics together, changing their meaning in the process.

In our current campaign, stranded on an island very far from civilization (X1 module from BECMI, The Isle of Dread), it was mostly a matter of survival, given that we're without divine spellcasters. So I filtered water (that we then had to purify by boiling it), excavating trenches for a defensible camp, I crumbled earth on some small cave entrances that were home to a primitive (stinky) race of humanoids to scare them away and make them leave the place, I made also lollipops with prestidigitation (*cough* can't be always doing only useful things, right?).

When we had more time, I mixed earth, water and driftwood together with large leaves and made a 3 rooms house surrounded by a moat.

Upon reaching level 7, at the end of our last session, I picked Fabricate as one of my spells. It's about time I started working in constructions, am I right? Dig up the terrain and build wooden houses!

Thank you for sharing! I love these spells. :smallsmile:

This so much this the wizard spell list is just that strong. Hence why this is my favorite way to distribute my levels when i play a wizard.

Yup. Basically it takes a lot to be worth it to slow down Wizard progression. Only a few things really compete.

LOL, such a noob mistake!

That changes things considerably!

It sure does. Optimized HBC combos are very strong. There's a lot of them, too -- Magic Missile is just one of many uses. And you can use more than one of them at the same time. It's quite versatile.

Basically you're getting a few main things from Hexblade dip:
- Access to a few key spells like Armor of Agathys.
- The ability to do very high damage when needed, via a variety of means. And when I say very high I'm not kidding, we're talking about 'kill Tiamat in one round' levels of direct damage, here. That's something Wizards don't normally do on demand.
- The ability to tank. Like, really tank. Like "eat your heart out, Barbarian" tank. Do not underestimate how hard it is to deal with a guy with 24 (or more) Shield AC, Armor of Agathys, Contingent Armor of Agathys, Fire Shield, Disadvantage to be hit, Counterspell, and so much more. Even if you don't want to do all that, you're a much harder target, which at a very minimum means you need to spend less resources on self-defense. It also means it's considerably harder to break your Concentration.

And some secondary things:
- Get extra cantrips and prepared slots.
- Get a regenerating level 1 spell slot (this is most relevant at lower levels, where it gives you more resource endurance than a straight Wizard, but it never stops being handy because level 1 spell slots never go out of style, things like Shield and Absorb Elemetns and PFG&E are relevant at all levels).
- Get an itemization advantage (e.g. you can use a lot more of the magic items in the game, should you find them)

Satori01

2020-09-13, 11:40 PM

Please do not edit quotes of my posts to say something different than what they say.

I did not edit your post to have it say something different. I quoted your post, and it formatted poorly to the webpage. I originally was going to remove your request to not derail the thread, but left that in as I thought it important to indicate, that it was not then, nor is it now, my intent to "derail the thread".

I only respond now, to dissuade and dispel any appearance or accusation of malfeasance.

Assuming that everyone's motives are pure, and there is no reason to believe otherwise, this thread can continue with it's ongoing conversation.

Skylivedk

2020-09-14, 04:18 AM

I'm not trying to derail the thread, but every poster except myself, has stated that multi-classing the Wizard is non-optimized...yourself included.

By all means please return to the discussion of 1 level of Arcana cleric vs a 1 level dip of Dragon Sorcerer...to channel my inner Burt Bacharach:

"What the world needs now, is 1600 posts on either a 1 level dip of cleric or dragon sorcerer "....
.....on second thought, this doesn't really trip off the tongue does it? :)

Per the PHB, pg 196:
A spell tells you which dice to roll for damage and whether to add any modifiers.
If a spell or other effect deals damage to more than one target at the same time, roll the damage once for all of them. For example, when a wizard casts fireball or a cleric casts flame strike, the spell's damage is rolled once for all creatures caught in the blast.

Does the above describe a Magic Missile spell with all missiles striking a single target?
It does not.

Each missile, from Magic Missile has a separate damage roll. Empowered Evocation allows you to add you INT modifier to one damage roll of any wizard evocation spell you cast.

To have Magic Missile qualify like a fireball for a single damage roll, you have to target multiple targets, negating the desired effect by Empowered Evocation, namely having it apply multiple times.

Hexblade's Curse, of course does apply to each missile.
That is all I will say...out of respect for my fellow posters.

Frogreaver know the parable of the Flame Tongue- whomever wields the Flame Tongue has the highest DPR.

Hexblade's Curse is a mini-Flame Tongue for spells. ;)

According to the link posted by LudicSavant, each magic missile gets affected by Empowered Evocation and Hexblade's Curse. You can rule differently, but in terms of official rulings that's the case, so for a guide built on official rulings, Hexblade deserves to be in a completely different tier than Sorcerer.

Miele

2020-09-14, 07:11 AM

Regarding the bonus damage applied to spells, I made a simple spreadsheet, mostly for myself and my friend, to have a rough idea of what we were talking about.
I was basically wondering why the official rule is "apply the bonus only once per damage roll", because the damage roll is quite different from Fireball to Scorching Ray.

Just being very basic, discounting critical hits, level 3 Scorching Ray *prenerf* would have done 8d6+20 and a Fireball on 4 targets would have done 8d6+20. Player would be left with the choice to pick the attack vs. AC or vs. dex ST. Up to here, I wouldn't have been much against the prenerf version. The problem is the double bonus and how it's affected by multipliers and the fact that MM is basically always a hit for max theoretycal damage (never miss and no save is just that good).

I do think that letting a player add the casting bonus damage to each roll could be too much honestly, but to each their own. It can work, maybe, under some circumstances, it's certainly a monstrous nova power that brings me back to BECMI era and multiple delayed Blast Fireballs dropped during a Time Stop, but what it does mostly, is to step above the only martial niche which is single target damage and at my table we didn't want that.

Nuclear Wizard MM upcast to 9th level with both Empowered Evo and Hexblade Curse is doing 159,5 damage and is an outlier because there is a very tiny chance the damage won't all be dealt (a Shield cast basically, or Brooch of Shielding) and also there is this trouble with Simulacrum that makes the first two rounds of the NW quite too strong, let alone if Action Surge is available. LudicSavant explains it well in the NW build post: getting up to 4 digit damage is not impossible, imo it's too much, but to each their own, maye in certain campaigns or at certain tables it could work, depends how precious are the resources and how important is to conserve them.

Here's the spreadsheet, no pretense to use it a scientific groundfloor, it was only napkin math to talk with a friend over rules and regulations. Check under prenerf Scorching Ray and picture it with Hexblade Curse (I didn't write it down, but it's basically +6 per Ray at level 20, so a theoretycal maximum of +60 damage for an upcast level 9 Scorching Ray).

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V9pC6RNb4oViH-JxOXHX1uv5doHh36XBjVi7h8QEGkc/edit?usp=sharing

P.S.: I didn't double check the math, there may be errors somewhere, most of it should be ok.

Frogreaver

2020-09-14, 07:14 AM

According to the link posted by LudicSavant, each magic missile gets affected by Empowered Evocation and Hexblade's Curse. You can rule differently, but in terms of official rulings that's the case, so for a guide built on official rulings, Hexblade deserves to be in a completely different tier than Sorcerer.

What he linked to was not an official ruling. The only official rulings are to be found in the sage advice document that they post.

https://media.wizards.com/2019/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf
Official rulings on how to interpret rules are made here in
the Sage Advice Compendium by the game’s lead rules designer, Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford on Twitter).
The public statements of the D&D team, or anyone else
at Wizards of the Coast, are not official rulings; they are
advice. Jeremy Crawford’s tweets are often a preview of rulings that will appear here.

I'm not trying to derail the thread, but every poster except myself, has stated that multi-classing the Wizard is non-optimized...yourself included.

By all means please return to the discussion of 1 level of Arcana cleric vs a 1 level dip of Dragon Sorcerer...to channel my inner Burt Bacharach:

"What the world needs now, is 1600 posts on either a 1 level dip of cleric or dragon sorcerer "....
.....on second thought, this doesn't really trip off the tongue does it? :)

Per the PHB, pg 196:
A spell tells you which dice to roll for damage and whether to add any modifiers.
If a spell or other effect deals damage to more than one target at the same time, roll the damage once for all of them. For example, when a wizard casts fireball or a cleric casts flame strike, the spell's damage is rolled once for all creatures caught in the blast.

Does the above describe a Magic Missile spell with all missiles striking a single target?
It does not.

Agreed. It's never actually spelled out what happens (in terms of rolling damage) when a spell like magic missile has all it's darts hit the same target. Very ambiguous I would say.

Each missile, from Magic Missile has a separate damage roll. Empowered Evocation allows you to add you INT modifier to one damage roll of any wizard evocation spell you cast.

Empowered Evocation doesn't actually say it applies to 1 damage roll. It says it applies to "the damage roll". I'm not sure there is a proper non-ambiguous way to reconcile "the damage roll" with a spell that provides multiple damage rolls. The closest reconciliation and best ruling in my mind would be that such an ability should apply to a single damage roll as you phrased it, but I don't think even that is clear cut.

To have Magic Missile qualify like a fireball for a single damage roll, you have to target multiple targets, negating the desired effect by Empowered Evocation, namely having it apply multiple times.

That's how I would rule it as well, but the RAW seems a bit ambiguous (see above comment)

Hexblade's Curse, of course does apply to each missile.
That is all I will say...out of respect for my fellow posters.

I don't see anything in the rules preventing magic missile damage from being viewed as a single damage roll when targeting a single creature. That is having magic missile hit something with 2 darts would be a single damage roll of 1d4+1 + 1d4+1. (Much like you could have a flame tongue longsword do 1d8+2d6+5 as a single damage roll). There's some support of this idea as well since instantaneous spells do their damage to more than 1 creature simultaneously then it would make sense for them to also do their damage to a single creature simultaneously.

Not saying this is the way I would rule, just that it appears valid to me.

Frogreaver know the parable of the Flame Tongue- whomever wields the Flame Tongue has the highest DPR.

Hexblade's Curse is a mini-Flame Tongue for spells. ;)

Lol yes.

MaxWilson

2020-09-14, 08:21 AM

What he linked to was not an official ruling.

Why does it matter? That link isn't even about Hexblade's Curse, it's about Empowered Evocation.

It is 100% clear that Magic Missile benefits from Hexblade's Curse, no matter whether you roll once and multiply or roll many times, because unlike Empowered Evocation it is not limited to once per round. This makes Hexblade/Wizard a much better Magic Missile burster than Sorc/Wizard, regardless of whether you're an Evoker or not.

Frogreaver

2020-09-14, 08:29 AM

Why does it matter? That link isn't even about Hexblade's Curse, it's about Empowered Evocation.

It is 100% clear that Magic Missile benefits from Hexblade's Curse, no matter whether you roll once and multiply or roll many times, because unlike Empowered Evocation it is not limited to once per round. This makes Hexblade/Wizard a much better Magic Missile burster than Sorc/Wizard, regardless of whether you're an Evoker or not.

If it's 100% clear then prove to me with RAW and/or Sage Advice compendium that magic missile when targeting a single creature with 3 darts doesn't have you make a single damage roll of 3d4+3 damage.

Lyracian

2020-09-14, 09:37 AM

Empowered Evocation doesn't actually say it applies to 1 damage roll. It says it applies to "the damage roll". I'm not sure there is a proper non-ambiguous way to reconcile "the damage roll" with a spell that provides multiple damage rolls. The closest reconciliation and best ruling in my mind would be that such an ability should apply to a single damage roll as you phrased it, but I don't think even that is clear cut.
You might want to check the official erratta as PHB has on page 117

..add your Intelligence modifier to one damage roll of any wizard evocation spell you cast.
I have never met a DM in real life who applies it as one damage roll for all missiles and lets Empowered Evocation give you *3 damage with Magic Missile.

If it's 100% clear then prove to me with RAW and/or Sage Advice compendium that magic missile when targeting a single creature with 3 darts doesn't have you make a single damage roll of 3d4+3 damage.
I agree with you that it would be a single 3d4+3 damage however to quote the OP can we move discussion of Nuclear Wizard and how Magic Missile works to another thread? Adding Proficiency to damage, even if only once per spell, is still a big bump that a Sorcerer or Cleric dip do not offer.

...nothing whatsoever to do with the Nuclear Wizard or anything else being discussed in this thread, so I'd appreciate if you didn't derail it.

While neither of us may agree with the Tweet LudicSavant, or anyone else writing guides, can only work from the stand point of what has been officially said. While this might not yet be in Sage Advice (and we can hope it never is) it is the closest answer to how rules work that is currently available.

LudicSavant

2020-09-14, 10:45 AM

Empowered Evocation doesn't actually say it applies to 1 damage roll.
:smallsigh: Yes it does. It says exactly that.

Beginning at 10th level, you can add your Intelligence modifier to one damage roll of any wizard evocation spell you cast.

Frogreaver

2020-09-14, 11:06 AM

:smallsigh: Yes it does. It says exactly that.

Not what my PHB says. Appears there was an errata on that one ;)

Skylivedk

2020-09-14, 04:16 PM

You might want to check the official erratta as PHB has on page 117

I have never met a DM in real life who applies it as one damage roll for all missiles and lets Empowered Evocation give you *3 damage with Magic Missile.

I agree with you that it would be a single 3d4+3 damage however to quote the OP can we move discussion of Nuclear Wizard and how Magic Missile works to another thread? Adding Proficiency to damage, even if only once per spell, is still a big bump that a Sorcerer or Cleric dip do not offer.

While neither of us may agree with the Tweet LudicSavant, or anyone else writing guides, can only work from the stand point of what has been officially said. While this might not yet be in Sage Advice (and we can hope it never is) it is the closest answer to how rules work that is currently available.
What do you mean, you can hope it never is? It already has been. LudicSavant provided the link earlier (to RPG Stack Exchange
https://forums.giantitp.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=24709034 where you'd find this: https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/557820938402947072)

So can we agree that discussion is done, dead, dusted and now a plant of something fruitful can grow in its earthly remains?

Empowered Evocation works because it is one damage roll and Hexblade's Curse would work on 1 or many damage rolls and deal proficiency bonus attack.

That leaves the Warlock with fewer cantrips, better slot economy early on, vastly better survivability, tremendously better offense if specced for it, a whole range of other items to use and a unique spell to boot.

And in return the Sorc has 2 extra cantrips and one extra spell prepared (besides not having AoA of course).

Kemev

2020-09-14, 08:49 PM

It might be worth noting which clerics get heavy vs medium armor. I realize it's niche, especially given that this forum really loves Dex builds, but there are some cleric/wizard builds that would benefit from ringmail or chainmail. (If nothing else, it'd be handy to know what the options are up front.)

LudicSavant

2020-09-14, 09:16 PM

Lyracian

2020-09-14, 11:37 PM

So can we agree that discussion is done, dead, dusted and now a plant of something fruitful can grow in its earthly remains?
I had already said the same but you are the one bringing it back up and asking questions about my post. I will not discuss the Nucular Wizard further but I will discuss what is and is not official rulings.

What do you mean, you can hope it never is? It already has been. LudicSavant provided the link earlier (to RPG Stack Exchange
https://forums.giantitp.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=24709034 where you'd find this: https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/557820938402947072)
That is not correct. If you look at what was posted this is a link to a Twitter not an actual ruling. I will re-quote what Frogreaver posted with the link to Sage Advice which clearly says "Jeremy Crawford’s tweets are often a preview of rulings that will appear here". They are not themselves rulings. As such I can hope that while this was his initial thoughts on the answer he, or other members of the team, may decide this is not the official answer and as such it will not appear in Sage Advice.

To me the only difference between Magic Missile and Scorching Ray is that Missiles automatically hit. Ray does not deal 2d6 * 3 if they all hit I would be rolling 6d6. Until such point as Sage Advice tell me otherwise I treat Magic Missile the same.

What he linked to was not an official ruling. The only official rulings are to be found in the sage advice document that they post.
https://media.wizards.com/2019/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf
Official rulings on how to interpret rules are made here in
the Sage Advice Compendium by the game’s lead rules designer, Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford on Twitter).
The public statements of the D&D team, or anyone else
at Wizards of the Coast, are not official rulings; they are
advice. Jeremy Crawford’s tweets are often a preview of rulings that will appear here.

MaxWilson

2020-09-15, 12:27 AM

To me the only difference between Magic Missile and Scorching Ray is that Missiles automatically hit. Ray does not deal 2d6 * 3 if they all hit I would be rolling 6d6. Until such point as Sage Advice tell me otherwise I treat Magic Missile the same.

FWIW, page 12 of the Sage Advice Compendium says to treat each Scorching Ray as a separate attack with its own damage roll (and therefore its own Hexblade's Curse bonus).

Q: When casting a spell that affects multiple targets, such
as scorching ray or eldritch blast, do I fire one ray or
beam, determine the result, and fire again? Or do I have
to choose all the targets before making any attack rolls?

A: Even though the duration of each of these spells is instanta-
neous, you choose the targets and resolve the attacks con-
secutively, not all at once. If you want, you can declare all
your targets before making any attacks, but you would still
roll separately for each attack (and damage, if appropriate).

BloodSnake'sCha

2020-09-15, 01:43 AM

Lyracian

2020-09-15, 06:36 AM

FWIW, page 12 of the Sage Advice Compendium says to treat each Scorching Ray as a separate attack with its own damage roll (and therefore its own Hexblade's Curse bonus).

I have made no comments about how Hex Blades Curse works with other spells; it is not a book I own and therefore I do not have exact wording for the rules. I think you may be confusing me with Satori01? I am merely pointing out that a Tweet is not considered an official ruling as per what is written in the Sage Advice document.

The 'Nuclear Wizard' from what I have read, stems from a fallacious reading of page 196 in the PHB. Upcasting Magic Missile and sending all the magic darts does not mean one can add their INT modifier and Hexblade Curse damage to each Missile. Some Hexblade players have attempted to argue that by RAW, the damage from Hexblade curse should apply to each individual roll of a d6, when a Hexblade attacks with a greatsword or maul.

diplomancer

2020-09-15, 09:41 AM

I know it's not RAW or even RAI, but I'd houserule empowered evocation as applying once to each target for those sort of effects. You want to do more damage, you've got to spread it around. It also brings it inline with other AoE spells which the designers probably had in mind for empowered evocation.

MaxWilson

2020-09-15, 10:45 AM

I have made no comments about how Hex Blades Curse works with other spells; it is not a book I own and therefore I do not have exact wording for the rules. I think you may be confusing me with Satori01? I am merely pointing out that a Tweet is not considered an official ruling as per what is written in the Sage Advice document.

Oh, I agree with you there. There are even outright rules errors in the Sage Advice Compendium itself (e.g. on nets, and Goodberry), but tweets are even less reliable.

That's why I say "FWIW" when referring to them. :) It doesn't hurt to know what Crawford once argued, but you don't have to pay attention if his argument is lacking. Sage Advice has a long history of questionable rulings, stretching way back into TSR days with Skip Williams.

Satori01

2020-09-15, 11:34 AM

So can we agree that discussion is done, dead, dusted and now a plant of something fruitful can grow in its earthly remains?

Absolutely, if we can also agree to use the most conservative interpretation of the Empowered Evocation and only allow the INT modifier to apply to a single Magic Missile projectile, and not to all.

As MaxWilson has already admirably stated, adding just the damage from Hexblade's Curse to MM, is a notable increase to damage.

1 level dips into Arcana cleric and Hexblade is an entirely viable option.
Arcana Cleric can allow you to take Cantrips, like Move Earth or Control Flames that you couldn't fit before.

A freely prepared Detect Magic is useful for those occasions when you do not have time to waste before getting your "magic test results back from the lab", and you need to expend a spell slot to know know if something has been affected by magic.
NOW!

Magic Missile + Hexblade's Curse for obvious reasons.

This would be a topic for a separate thread, but how much of the Nuclear Wizard can you model thru Arcana Cleric and Hexblade?

Unless your table allows a PC to Misty Step out of their armor, Heavy Armor on a Wizard puts them at a severe burn risk from a Heat Metal spell.

To doff medium armor with help, takes 5 rounds.
In contrast, to doff heavy armor, even with help, takes 25 rounds.

Medium armor and a Shield is all you need. Taking heavy armor means using Counterspells and spell slots on any casting of Heat Metal on your person.

Satori01

2020-09-15, 11:38 AM

It doesn't hurt to know what Crawford once argued, but you don't have to pay attention if his argument is lacking. Sage Advice has a long history of questionable rulings, stretching way back into TSR days with Skip Williams.

Quoted, for truth.

I've met Skip at Cons before, he is super nice, but the Sage Advice column just fell into his lap. Everyone at TSR dropped being the rules guru like a hot potatoe...Skip just got stuck with it. :)

Kemev

2020-09-15, 11:47 AM

Does anyone have a recommendation on what to do with a:
Tempest cleric 2/ Order of Scribe wizard 5+

It is a really nice multiclass wizard a player in my ToA game got and I wonder how you guys will improve it.
Right now his big thing is Electric Fireball Maximised.

If you're at level 7 with this build, you've started living your best life. Lightning Bolt + Destructive Wrath is pretty sweet. If you want some fine tuning, you probably need some to provide some extra info (race, stats, playstyle, etc.)

What's electrifying Fireball?

x3n0n

2020-09-15, 11:54 AM

If you're at level 7 with this build, you've started living your best life. Lightning Bolt + Destructive Wrath is pretty sweet. If you want some fine tuning, you probably need some to provide some extra info (race, stats, playstyle, etc.)

What's electrifying Fireball?

I assume it's this Order of Scribes feature: "When you cast a wizard spell with a spell slot, you can temporarily replace its damage type with the damage type of another spell in your spellbook, as your spellbook magically alters the spell’s formula for this casting."

That allows for the Lightning Bolt combo, but with Fireball.

MaxWilson

2020-09-15, 11:58 AM

(B) Absolutely, if we can also agree to use the most conservative interpretation of the Empowered Evocation and only allow the INT modifier to apply to a single Magic Missile projectile, and not to all.

As MaxWilson has already admirably stated, adding just the damage from Hexblade's Curse to MM, is a notable increase to damage.

1 level dips into Arcana cleric and Hexblade is an entirely viable option.
Arcana Cleric can allow you to take Cantrips, like Move Earth or Control Flames that you couldn't fit before.

A freely prepared Detect Magic is useful for those occasions when you do not have time to waste before getting your "magic test results back from the lab", and you need to expend a spell slot to know know if something has been affected by magic.
NOW!

Magic Missile + Hexblade's Curse for obvious reasons.

This would be a topic for a separate thread, but how much of the Nuclear Wizard can you model thru Arcana Cleric and Hexblade?

(A) Unless your table allows a PC to Misty Step out of their armor, Heavy Armor on a Wizard puts them at a severe burn risk from a Heat Metal spell.

To doff medium armor with help, takes 5 rounds.
In contrast, to doff heavy armor, even with help, takes 25 rounds.

Medium armor and a Shield is all you need. Taking heavy armor means using Counterspells and spell slots on any casting of Heat Metal on your person.

(A) I doubt any rational wizard's response to Heat Metal would be to try to doff their armor in the middle of combat, no matter whether the armor is medium or heavy. They're probably going to try to Dispel it, or break the caster's concentration (perhaps by killing the caster). Worst comes to worst (maybe an assassination scenario outside of combat where they didn't see the caster), they'll get an ally to put up a heals-over-time spell like Aura of Vitality to counteract the damage-over-time from Heat Metal.

If your response to Heat Metal on your medium armor is to chortle, "Haha, you thought I would Counterspell but I fooled you!" and enlist another PC to help you climb out of your armor... I pity your fellow PCs. The enemy just rendered two PCs useless for the duration of the fight with a single 2nd level spell.

So there isn't really a meaningful difference between Medium/Heavy armor w/rt Heat Metal.

(B) Probably the most we can do is agree that it's going to vary on a table-by-table basis. Hexvokers will be excellent at nova damage at tables where Crawford's word carries weight, and also at tables that ignore Crawford but think it's dumb to tie the power of special abilities to the particular way you roll Magic Missile damage (N x d4+1 vs. Nd4+N) and so grant Empowered Evocation bonus damage to all Magic Missiles, all Scorching Rays, all targets of a Fireball (even if you roll damage separately for each one, ignoring the PHB advice to roll once per Fireball), etc.

At tables where this doesn't happen, you're more likely to see Hexblade/Necromancers, Hexblade/Illusionists, etc. Either way Hexblade is definitely bringing a strong nova capability to the build.

Kemev

2020-09-15, 12:12 PM

Unless your table allows a PC to Misty Step out of their armor, Heavy Armor on a Wizard puts them at a severe burn risk from a Heat Metal spell.

To doff medium armor with help, takes 5 rounds.
In contrast, to doff heavy armor, even with help, takes 25 rounds.

Medium armor and a Shield is all you need. Taking heavy armor means using Counterspells and spell slots on any casting of Heat Metal on your person.

Is this something that comes up routinely? It's not like there are a ton of monsters with druid spells (and even the stock NPC druids don't have heat metal on their spell lists). And if a wizard is getting Heat'd, waiting 5 rounds to take off their Medium armor probably isn't a solution to the problem... the fix is killing the thing that cast Heat Metal.

If it's something a player was really worried about, there's the Cast-Off armor enchantment from Xanathar's Guide. Otherwise, I feel like telling people "Yeah you should take a -1 or 2 to AC (a stat that is relevant every combat) to avoid this niche scenario" probably isn't great advice.

Edit: got ninja'd by Max. Didn't intend this to be piling on.

Skylivedk

2020-09-15, 12:13 PM

Absolutely, if we can also agree to use the most conservative interpretation of the Empowered Evocation and only allow the INT modifier to apply to a single Magic Missile projectile, and not to all.

As MaxWilson has already admirably stated, adding just the damage from Hexblade's Curse to MM, is a notable increase to damage.

1 level dips into Arcana cleric and Hexblade is an entirely viable option.
Arcana Cleric can allow you to take Cantrips, like Move Earth or Control Flames that you couldn't fit before.

A freely prepared Detect Magic is useful for those occasions when you do not have time to waste before getting your "magic test results back from the lab", and you need to expend a spell slot to know know if something has been affected by magic.
NOW!

Magic Missile + Hexblade's Curse for obvious reasons.

This would be a topic for a separate thread, but how much of the Nuclear Wizard can you model thru Arcana Cleric and Hexblade?

Unless your table allows a PC to Misty Step out of their armor, Heavy Armor on a Wizard puts them at a severe burn risk from a Heat Metal spell.

To doff medium armor with help, takes 5 rounds.
In contrast, to doff heavy armor, even with help, takes 25 rounds.

Medium armor and a Shield is all you need. Taking heavy armor means using Counterspells and spell slots on any casting of Heat Metal on your person.
Why would I agree to that when the designer says otherwise? Doffing armour in combat... That's a lenient DM.

FWIW, I house rule a ton, so Nuclear Wizard doesn't work that way in my games, but that's because I/we have gotten rid of most the Hexblade and folded it into invocations and Pact of the Blade. I haven't had an evoker so I haven't checked if I would see a need to nerf it. I doubt it though.

Oh, I agree with you there. There are even outright rules errors in the Sage Advice Compendium itself (e.g. on nets, and Goodberry), but tweets are even less reliable.

That's why I say "FWIW" when referring to them. :) It doesn't hurt to know what Crawford once argued, but you don't have to pay attention if his argument is lacking. Sage Advice has a long history of questionable rulings, stretching way back into TSR days with Skip Williams.
Agreed on this point, but I do understand and sympathise with guides using the clarifications from designers. I wouldn't for a while bunch of reasons (Shield Master being just a tiny fraction of them), but that's a whole nother discussion.

And pardon my mix-up between Sage Advice and the tweet series. I (mis?)remembered the tweets back then as having official rulings weight

MaxWilson

2020-09-15, 12:19 PM

And pardon my mix-up between Sage Advice and the tweet series. I (mis?)remembered the tweets back then as having official rulings weight

They did at one point, although it was never clear exactly what "official" meant except that it clearly meant no one else at WotC had to deal with them. (I.e. that part of PR was Crawford's job.) Eventually though WotC and Crawford realized that encouraging people to rely on tweets that Crawford sent while e.g. standing in line at the grocery store, without even having his rulebooks around, was a bad (chaotic, unreliable, unstable) communication format, and they started retroactively discouraging people from relying overmuch on the tweets.

Klorox

2020-09-16, 09:26 AM

BloodSnake'sCha

2020-09-16, 09:57 AM

When I look over it all, I can kinda see the argument for making a sorcerer dip green instead of orange, but this seems like a pointless argument, as cleric and hexblade are both better.

The only time I think I'd choose sorcerer over one of those two is if I were making a bladesinger, and choosing draconic sorcerer were better than using a spell slot on the mage armor spell.

Even then, I think I'd prefer starting fighter 1 for better HP, better stat synergy, and the same AC as mage armor with studded leather and the defense fighting style.

SMH.

If we are taking UA the order of the scribe we can make something out of draconic sorcerer extra damage with nuclear wizard.
Tempest Cleric Channel Divinity + Draconic Sorcerer extra damage + Hexblade curse with electric MM can be nice.

Satori01

2020-09-16, 11:47 AM

(A) I doubt any rational wizard's response to Heat Metal would be to try to doff their armor in the middle of combat, no matter whether the armor is medium or heavy. They're probably going to try to Dispel it, or break the caster's concentration (perhaps by killing the caster).
So there isn't really a meaningful difference between Medium/Heavy armor w/rt Heat Metal.
[

Worst case scenario is for whatever reason a Dispel Magic is not available and you are stuck shedding your armor before it cooks you.

Heavy Armor nets 1 more point of AC, compared to Medium Armor.
Maybe this is paranoid, but one more point of AC does not outweigh the risk, and commiserate Resource Expenditure cost to deal with Heat Metal.

Max, you have stated you hoard your spell slot resources...you would most likely have the means to deal with Heat Metal. Other players, especially newer players are more profligate when casting spells.

Is this something that comes up routinely? It's not like there are a ton of monsters with druid spells (Didn't intend this to be piling on.

Pile on! I don't mind being the thread goat. :)
What you describe is very campaign specific. I always customize the spell load outs of monsters, the defaults largely suck. MToF gives suggestions re: thematic spell list add ones to the spell lists of Adherents for Demon Lords or Arch Devils.

Games set in Eberron or Ravinica have widescale changes to what spells are accessible.

I don't like to over share campaign details..but in an Eberron game I ran, the chief shadowy villain was a splinter group of House Vadalis...Druids and Enchanters.

(Druid Thieves Guilds are awesome...no one suspects the humble sparrow!)

Honestly, when I brought up Druid style anti-Polymorph tactics in the "Is Polymorph Overated" thread...the options I offered generated some consternation as well.

Some DMs, use Druidical foes and spells, on the regular.

Lyracian

2020-09-17, 02:42 PM

Heavy Armor nets 1 more point of AC, compared to Medium Armor.
Maybe this is paranoid, but one more point of AC does not outweigh the risk, and commiserate Resource Expenditure cost to deal with Heat Metal.
Like drowning it is a very edge case. I have had a paladin trade down to Leather for a couple of missions during Saltmarsh as they were on the water. If you are expecting a particular spell you might want to change armour. If the game world has none metal armour for druids you could just wear that instead. I do not see trading down to metal medium armour a compelling strategy.

I would still rather spend 5 rounds attacking the caster, along with my ally, rather than having both of us working on taking off armour and potentially both taking fire damage.

LudicSavant

2020-09-17, 03:24 PM

Here's an example of a Forge-dip Wizard, demonstrating their capacity for handily out-tanking Barbarians. While, of course, still being great at typical Wizard things.

The Forged Dwarven Steel Wizard
https://i.imgur.com/mBoKuxh.jpg
Warding Dwarf Forge Cleric 1 / Wizard 19
Starting Point Buy: 17 Con / 16 Int / 14 Wis / 10 Dex
ASIs: Res(Con), Max Int, Warcaster, Lucky
Cantrips x8
Spells prepared x29 (plus the spells prepared of their Simulacrum)

Consider a stereotypical Half-Orc Barbarian. He has 17 or 19 AC, 14 or 16 Con (they're somewhat MAD and don't have a clear 'I want this' +1 Con half-feat like Wizards do), is reckless attacking like half the time (which significantly increases the number of hits and crits you take), is raging in maybe 2/3 combats over the course of a typical adventuring day (depends on level, etc), and their defense is not well rounded (e.g. poor mental saves, no counterspells, little control, etc). They probably spent their ASIs on something like Max Strength, a combat feat like GWM or Sentinel so that enemies actually care they exist instead of just completely ignoring them, and Res(Wis) and that's pretty much all they can afford over their whole progression.

Now let's take a Mark of Warding Forge Abjurer. She started with 17 Con / 16 Int / 14 Wis / 10 Dex, and bumps that Con to 18 when she gets Resilient. And she has 21 base AC, and tons of ways to bump it, like Shield, Shield of Faith (which is only a bonus action to cast and has a generous duration), and tons of things that impose Disadvantage or otherwise control the enemy. She has roughly the same HP as the Barbarian before we count her Ward recharging or Armor of Agathys or any of that stuff... and once we count that she has considerably more.

I'm not kidding about that HP either. Just counting the base Ward + base HP, this Abjurer has 207 hp at level 20 to the Barbarian's 245 (and 40 of that is from their capstone). So it comes down to who has the better mitigation tools on top of that.

In one corner, we have Rage. It halves damage of certain types! It's even slightly better than that, because damage rounds down when halved.

However, in the other corner, we have... an entire giant list of things.

You have a far, far higher AC than the Barbarian (with Shield, typically AC 26, 28, or 26+Disadvantage to be hit). This on its own mitigates more damage than Rage in many scenarios (against mook swarms in particular, vastly more), and that's even if the Barbarian is never using Reckless and always holds a shield. But this is just the very tip of an enormous iceberg.

Speaking of ice, we've got pretty much the best Armor of Agathys combo in the game. For example, we could cast a level 5 Armor of Agathys for 25 temporary hit points, and 10 arcane ward points. And then the enemy would have to break the ward points before they can even damage the temporary hit points. Your ward can have up to 45 hp (plus regeneration), and your Simulacrum can have another ward of up to 45 hp (plus regeneration) that they can extend to you, so breaking a single Armor of Agathys spell on either of you can take well over 100 damage just from that.

And when they break that Armor of Agathys? They activate your Contingency: Level 5 Armor of Agathys and get another 25 temp hp and 10 ward hp to deal with. In other words, melee foes simply die before they can even scratch your real hit points. Which is especially nice for your Simulacrum, who doesn't have that many real hit points and is far tankier than a typical Wizard's glass cannon simulacrum.

Oh, and this can of course stack with further sources of retribution damage, like Fire Shield (which has a generous duration and doesn't take Concentration). Though it's basically just overkill at that point. Trying to beat you in a melee slugfest is suicide.

But that's not all. Oh no.

You have Resistance to poison, acid, cold, fire, lightning, or thunder damage.

And Resistance to all damage from spells. And Advantage on saves against spells and poison. Essentially Bear Totem has nothing on you.

And your race gives you +1d4 to Investigation and Thieves Tools (on top of Wizards already having good Investigation and Arcana, and your familiar having 18 passive perception with Keen Senses), plus all the spells and rituals that are useful for dealing with traps and such. So you're an excellent trap-monkey who can just shrug off the effects of the few traps they might actually fail to find.

And you generate a ton more hit points than that base 207 via your ward regeneration and your temp HP spells. In fact, you're likely to more than double your effective hit points via these things.. For example, if we just count your racial spells, your level 1 slots spent on stuff like Shield or PFG&E, your Contingency and level 5 slots + Arcane Recovery spent on Armor of Agathys, your level 3 slots spent on Counterspell, and your two base wards, that's already 289 hp value (plus the value of the other effects of those spells). And I'm not even using nearly all of the resources here (you still have all your level 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and 9 slots. And all your simulacrum's slots. And your rituals and...).

And all of that is before we even mention Spell Mastery, which just lets you regenerate your ward forever and have infinite Shield/Blur (or whatever other combo you want). Before that, you can convert time into ward hp with Alarm rituals.

Even the odd lucky enemy crit can just get rerolled by Lucky.

And you have counters for just about every kind of offensive strategy. Counterspells, dispels, walls, slows, etc. And not just any Counterspells, but buffed Abjurer counterspells. Heck, you might even get disabled, only for your Simulacrum to be able to dispel it with *their* actions.

And then on top of that there's all the other usual Wizard control shenanigans.

You are, more or less, impregnable. A Barbarian can only dream of being this tough to kill, and you're harder to ignore or run away from than they are.

You can even go for overkill and optimize it further by adding the silly free power creep that is GGtR backgrounds, grabbing you extra useful Abjuration spells (potential options include Aid, Pass Without Trace, Death Ward, Warding Bond, Freedom of Movement) or things like Spirit Guardians.

It's strong at low levels too, and scales pretty evenly throughout the game. I mean, the whole Armor of Agathys + Arcane Ward + high AC thing is all online by level 3. And the racial spells provide a rather significant extra amount of ward recovery straight from low levels (8 hp worth, which is basically twice as much value as the Hill Dwarf's extra hp at low levels... before we even count the effects of those racial spells).

Variants:
- You can take Warcaster early (at 4) if you want to exert more OA pressure and be a stickier frontliner. And leave Res(Con) for later.
- If you roll for stats or something, you might have space for an extra feat. My go-to choice would probably be Alert.
- As mentioned, you can take GGtR backgrounds if you want extra cheese on your dwarf pizza. Orzhov can get you Guidance and Spirit Guardians, which is a great control ability for a tanky mage.

Lyracian

2020-09-18, 10:56 AM

Here's an example of a Forge-dip Wizard, demonstrating their capacity for handily out-tanking Barbarians. While, of course, still being great at typical Wizard things.
The Forged Dwarven Steel Wizard

The Warding Dwarf and Spells of the Mark racial feature are amazing. If I ever played an Eborron game this is what I would pick. As I understand if you can even prepare Armour of Agathys as one of your Cleric spells so you do not have to worry about it interrupting your selection of Wizard spells.

LudicSavant

2020-09-18, 12:36 PM

The Warding Dwarf and Spells of the Mark racial feature are amazing. If I ever played an Eborron game this is what I would pick. As I understand if you can even prepare Armour of Agathys as one of your Cleric spells so you do not have to worry about it interrupting your selection of Wizard spells.

Yep. You basically get to carry around PFG&E, Armor of Agathys, and Shield of Faith all the time with your Cleric prep slots. And they never cease to be top shelf spells for an armored abjurer.

Frogreaver

2020-09-18, 10:24 PM

Here's an example of a Forge-dip Wizard, demonstrating their capacity for handily out-tanking Barbarians. While, of course, still being great at typical Wizard things.

First off, nice build.

A few thoughts:

If I was going to build a barbarian whose primary purpose was to absorb damage I would go Variant Human (Toughness) with 16/14/16/8/10/8. He would use a sword and a shield and rarely ever reckless attack

Even against that build a cleric/wizard of nearly any level that dedicates all slots to shield/armor of agathys can out tank the barbarian. The more important question is what is the resource cost of doing so? What is the offensive tradeoff of doing so? Providing that sufficient attacks come your way, there are some common scenarios at level 5 where it will take 6 slots on shield to out tank said barbarian. Its not clear cut that having a few level 3+ level slots and then cantrips the rest of the day is actually better in combats at these levels than making 2 melee strength attacks.

More important thoughts:

Tanking isn't all that important in the grand scheme of 5e combat.

Armor of Agathys actually pairs poorly with extremely high AC and the shield spell - it only has a 1 hour duration. If you don't get hit in that timeframe then it's basically a wasted slot. I'd actually make the case that armor of agathys is actually overvalued for this build.

Most important thought:

Killing enemies faster also tends to reduce the damage you and your team ultimately takes. It's harder to quantify though as it's not just your damage that needs factored into this but also your party members damages and damage buffs.

LudicSavant

2020-09-18, 11:33 PM

If I was going to build a barbarian whose primary purpose was to absorb damage I would go Variant Human (Toughness) with 16/14/16/8/10/8. He would use a sword and a shield and rarely ever reckless attack

I would generally recommend not doing this. As a Barbarian you really want to improve your ability to tank, rather than your ability to merely turtle. Getting a couple extra hit points from Toughness is not going to be doing you a lot of favors compared to giving your enemies a reason to actually care that you're on the map.

Even if all you cared about was personal durability, I would recommend turning your attention to making your defenses more well-rounded. For example, enemies can just bypass your hit points by targeting your mental saves.

Even against that build a cleric/wizard of nearly any level that dedicates all slots to shield/armor of agathys can out tank the barbarian. The more important question is what is the resource cost of doing so?

Under pretty much no circumstances should you be 'dedicating all slots to shield/armor of agathys.' Nor do you need to. Note how in my example only a fraction of available resources were used.

Like if you actually dedicated all your resources to that, your hit points pool you could draw on would be over 1000. On top of a better AC. You do not need that much.

it only has a 1 hour duration. 1 hour duration is basically the entire period between at least short rests in dungeoneering scenarios.

And if you're in a scenario where it wouldn't be good to use, you use a different spell.

Armor of Agathys actually pairs poorly with extremely high AC and the shield spell
I can assure you, it pairs just fine.

21 AC is high, but not so high that big foes can't hit you. And while you kinda want them to hit while AoA is active, you don't actually want them to be able to burst you (at least if you're like me and want to be able to take 6+ Deadly encounters a day with a Tucker's Kobolds / old school meat grinder DM). And the ability to selectively pump up your AC means you can block the kinds of attacks you might want to save your armor/ward from, like ranged ones. Also, if your ward can't be burst through quickly, you can potentially regenerate the ward and get more retribution hits out of that single spell slot, making you more resource-efficient.

Even more importantly, you want to have a variety of kinds of defense. You're not taking Shield and Armor of Agathys primarily because you want to stack them together, but because they are most effective against entirely different kinds of enemy offense. For example, if you're up against 100 archers, Shield can straight up shrug off an attack that would lay a Barbarian (or your Armor of Agathys) low. If you're up against a Deadly multiattacker with +17 to hit, Armor of Agathys will render their attacks suicidal.

You do not just stack all your abilities together and spam them. Adjust your mentality. You are Batman. You pick the correct (most efficient) tool in your toolbelt for the situation. If you are not in that situation, you use a different tool. If you're doing it properly, you should be highly efficient and be going strong throughout a long adventuring day.

Additionally, as mentioned, it makes a great Contingency, which you can have trigger after a hit is already confirmed.

Killing enemies faster also tends to reduce the damage you and your team ultimately takes. It's harder to quantify though as it's not just your damage that needs factored into this but also your party members damages and damage buffs.

Yes, which is why I generally don't recommend your "Tough" feat choice.

Frogreaver

2020-09-19, 02:00 AM

I would generally recommend not doing this. As a Barbarian you really want to improve your ability to tank, rather than your ability to merely turtle. Getting a couple extra hit points from Toughness is not going to be doing you a lot of favors compared to giving your enemies a reason to actually care that you're on the map.

Even if all you cared about was personal durability, I would recommend turning your attention to making your defenses more well-rounded. For example, enemies can just bypass your hit points by targeting your mental saves.

Under pretty much no circumstances should you be 'dedicating all slots to shield/armor of agathys.' Nor do you need to. Note how in my example only a fraction of available resources were used.

Like if you actually dedicated all your resources to that, your hit points pool you could draw on would be over 1000. On top of a better AC. You do not need that much.

1 hour duration is basically the entire period between at least short rests in dungeoneering scenarios.

And if you're in a scenario where it wouldn't be good to use, you use a different spell.

I can assure you, it pairs just fine.

21 AC is high, but not so high that big foes can't hit you. And while you kinda want them to hit while AoA is active, you don't actually want them to be able to burst you (at least if you're like me and want to be able to take 6+ Deadly encounters a day with a Tucker's Kobolds / old school meat grinder DM). And the ability to selectively pump up your AC means you can block the kinds of attacks you might want to save your armor/ward from, like ranged ones. Also, if your ward can't be burst through quickly, you can potentially regenerate the ward and get more retribution hits out of that single spell slot, making you more resource-efficient.

Even more importantly, you want to have a variety of kinds of defense. You're not taking Shield and Armor of Agathys primarily because you want to stack them together, but because they are most effective against entirely different kinds of enemy offense. For example, if you're up against 100 archers, Shield can straight up shrug off an attack that would lay a Barbarian (or your Armor of Agathys) low. If you're up against a Deadly multiattacker with +17 to hit, Armor of Agathys will render their attacks suicidal.

You do not just stack all your abilities together and spam them. Adjust your mentality. You are Batman. You pick the correct (most efficient) tool in your toolbelt for the situation. If you are not in that situation, you use a different tool. If you're doing it properly, you should be highly efficient and be going strong throughout a long adventuring day.

Additionally, as mentioned, it makes a great Contingency, which you can have trigger after a hit is already confirmed.

Yes, which is why I generally don't recommend your "Tough" feat choice.

Please don’t act like I am making a recommendation I’m not making.

My suggestion was about comparing an actual barbarian tank to your tank wizard in terms of tankiness. You went out of your way to give the wizard build extra tanking abilities but used a mostly basic barbarian build to compare its tanking to.

LudicSavant

2020-09-19, 02:18 AM

Please don’t act like I am making a recommendation I’m not making. Don't think I did. You were suggesting that Toughness would make the Barbarian a better example of a tank Barbarian. I disagree.

Either way, the Barbarian you suggested does not catch up, so I'm not seeing what it's adding to the conversation.

Skylivedk

2020-09-19, 02:21 AM

Please don’t act like I am making a recommendation I’m not making.

My suggestion was about comparing an actual barbarian tank to your tank wizard in terms of tankiness. You went out of your way to give the wizard build extra tanking abilities but used a mostly basic barbarian build to compare its tanking to.

Can you be more specific? You did say to use a sword and shield and Toughness right? Why not just ignore this Barbarian? What can he do that is in any way dangerous? 2 x 1d8+MOD+rage in damage with no status effects? Grapple one opponent? It sounds like he isn't worth dealing with really.

At the same time, ironically, you are the one suggesting that Shield and AoA would be used anti-synergistically.

LudicSavant

2020-09-19, 04:57 AM

The Steel Wizard is truly dauntingly durable, particularly at high levels. An ancient black dragon's multiattack with +15 to hit would only do... 11.83 DPR using nothing but your Spell Mastery at-wills, and you never got even a single magic item in your entire career. For reference, an AC 19 would take 48.1 DPR from the same thing, and an AC 15 would take 56.8.

That's with no resources at all. And against many weaker foes, the difference is far greater still (as an example, you would take only 2.5 DPR from 100 bandits firing at you, again, just with your at-wills). That's less than your ward regeneration. You can literally just sit in the middle of an army of mooks taking attacks all day.

And you can get that kind of durability at earlier levels, too. You just need to actually use some low level spell resources for it back then.

And it's not just physical attacks. You have the tools to shrug off spells, elemental attacks, mental saves... you have the tools to deal with basically everything.

Importantly, you do it all quite resource-efficiently, and while being able to protect allies and screw over enemies.

And then there's all those hit points you can generate. You can generate an awful lot with your ward, as well as spells like Armor of Agathys (which are extra effective, since they regen your ward too). The 8 extra hp from your racial spells is extra helpful for kickstarting low levels.

Frogreaver

2020-09-19, 10:10 AM

Don't think I did. You were suggesting that Toughness would make the Barbarian a better example of a tank Barbarian. I disagree.

Either way, the Barbarian you suggested does not catch up, so I'm not seeing what it's adding to the conversation.

I spelled it out once already...

It gives us a baseline for comparing so we know how many spell slots you need to use to be on equal footing (in terms of tankiness). At level 5 that's approximately 6 low level slots. Essentially leaving you 2 level 2 slots and 2 level 3 slots to cast level 2 offensive spells in. Which at this level makes the raging barbarian with 2 longsword attacks quite a bit more dangerous for equal amounts of tankiness.

I think you over focus on level 20 skews class comparisons as the game is much more about the journey than the final destination.

Can you be more specific? You did say to use a sword and shield and Toughness right? Why not just ignore this Barbarian? What can he do that is in any way dangerous? 2 x 1d8+MOD+rage in damage with no status effects? Grapple one opponent? It sounds like he isn't worth dealing with really.

See explanation above.

At the same time, ironically, you are the one suggesting that Shield and AoA would be used anti-synergistically.

Synergistic abilities enhance each other's effects. Anti-synergistic abilities diminish effects. As clearly seen, the more you boost your AC the more diminished of an effect armor of agathys is likely to have.

If you use armor of agathys it's wasted unless you are hit in the next hour. High AC and the shield spell do a good job keeping you from being hit. Thus, in actual play there is moderate to high probability that you will have wasted whatever temp hp Armor of Agathys provided.

Skylivedk

2020-09-19, 12:40 PM

I spelled it out once already...

It gives us a baseline for comparing so we know how many spell slots you need to use to be on equal footing (in terms of tankiness). At level 5 that's approximately 6 low level slots. Essentially leaving you 2 level 2 slots and 2 level 3 slots to cast level 2 offensive spells in. Which at this level makes the raging barbarian with 2 longsword attacks quite a bit more dangerous for equal amounts of tankiness.

I think you over focus on level 20 skews class comparisons as the game is much more about the journey than the final destination.

See explanation above.

Synergistic abilities enhance each other's effects. Anti-synergistic abilities diminish effects. As clearly seen, the more you boost your AC the more diminished of an effect armor of agathys is likely to have.

If you use armor of agathys it's wasted unless you are hit in the next hour. High AC and the shield spell do a good job keeping you from being hit. Thus, in actual play there is moderate to high probability that you will have wasted whatever temp hp Armor of Agathys provided.
TLDR: Frogreaver's Barbarian is a horrible tank and damage dealer, kinda tagging along at level 5 and then left forever behind in the dust doing very little of note.

EDIT: I don't mean to imply in this post that DPR is a good measure of effectiveness. I use it for simplicity. I would say the Forge/Wiz is way better doing a bunch of other things (i.e. Use Web, Unseen Servant, Familiar, Hypnotic Pattern, etc. etc.,). DPR was used in this simple simulation to show that Sword and Shield Barbarian is also pretty useless in terms of DPR. Further: I made a mistake forgetting the extra rage gotten at level 6. Tbh though: it wouldn't change the combat 6 conclusion, since 4 attacks with Rage would still be less than a Fireball with 3 targets leaving the Forge Wizard with 2 shatters and 1 Firebolt round more of free extra damage.

So in melee against many small attacks, you don't use Shield. Against huge attacks and ranged, you might. Anyway, I'll play along with your premise, except I'll go to level 6

Fireball is an average of 27 damage pre save per target.

Young Bobo deals 4,5+4+2 = 10,5 average per attack that hits, or 21 DPR pre miss and crit chance.

With a rough estimation, I'll pretend that saves are about half the time so the average target for a fireball takes 75% damage or 20,25.

With miss and crit included (+4 modifier), Bobo is doing 14,1 DPR while raging (using LudicSavant's DPR calculator). With advantage that's 19,305 (but reckless attack wasn't your thing for this build IIRC).

In total: each target hit by a fireball is worth more than a round of Bobo attacking. I'd say 3-4 targets are pretty standard. 3 targets would be more than Bobo attacking for 4 rounds: standard combat length (actually a bit longer I think... Standard encounter is just about 3).

This is of course before adding in cantrips which would add another 7,7 DPR post miss chance (using Firebolt) and without the DPR from Armour of Agathys.

Anyway, for each of those two encounters where the Wizard has thrown a fireball he has earned post miss damage of 27,45 damage or 54,9 in total. More than 3 more rounds of Bobo attacking.

In the third encounter Bobo swings his pointy stick 4 times (in the third and last encounter with Rage), due to the excess damage from the prior two encounters the Wizard still comes out ahead using only cantrips with 29,3.

Now Bobo is less dangerous. He only deals 11.5 damage per round or 46 over the course of a 4 round combat. Wizard does 30,8 in the same amount of time, so he can just about go through combat 4 and 5 and would only end up behind Bobo with 1.1 damage.

Unfortunately for Bobo, young Wizzie is still spiffy with 2 level 2 slots and 1 level 3 slot and could utterly wreck the last encounter. Each shatter with 3 targets would do 30,375 damage and the fireball would still do 60,75 while 4 rounds of Bobo mania would be 46 - less than half.

If you run the same simulation at level 5, shatter upcast would need to hit 4 targets to do 54 damage (post saves), which would be 3,6 less than 4 rounds of Bobo attacking with rage. The two first combats would hence end with a 39 damage lead for the Wizard. Reduce the targets to 3 each time and you're looking at a lead of 12.

Next two combats the Wizard would do a combined damage of 2 x 53,475 (6 x cantrips + 2 x level 2 shatter) = 106,95 damage post saves, miss and crits.

Bobo would do 14.4 x 4 + 11.5 x 4 = 103.6.

He would hence be 15.35 behind by combat 5.

After combat 5, he'd be .15 behind and he'd end by being 15.05 ahead...

Unless we add a single target more to some of the shatters or any procs from AoA. From level 6 and onwards, there is no competition (if you felt there was one before that is). Bobo is left in the dust both in terms of damage and tankiness. If you adjust the the save percentage to something more realistic like 30-40% of the time, the results are even worse.

LudicSavant

2020-09-19, 01:13 PM

As clearly seen, the more you boost your AC the more diminished of an effect armor of agathys is likely to have. This hasn't been 'clearly seen,' it's been asserted by just you, with others disagreeing.

I can assure you, both from math and extensive in-game experience, that your assumption is not true.

AC has a multiplicative effect on the value of each hit point (temporary or otherwise) that you have. Not a diminishing return, an escalating (https://i.postimg.cc/MTvcMjvC/Arcane-Trickster5save-HP.png) one, so long as those temp HP actually get used. And I've never had trouble using them, especially in high-op games where I'm expected to fight numerous Deadly threats a day.

In order to 'waste' Armor of Agathys, you need to have all of the following happen. You must choose to cast it in a situation where enemies are unlikely to be able to hit AC 21 or 20 (if you gave your forge bonus to someone else) at all in the next full hour (enough for several encounters in a dungeoneering scenario), and get no benefit from just walking through all their OAs, or punishing target switches, or the like.

And even if all that happens (and that's no small if -- I can't remember the last time it happened to me), you at least get a consolation prize of approx 1/3rd of the value of a (AoA's spell slot) level False Life in ward regeneration hp.

If you find that you are frequently wasting Armor of Agathys, the problem is probably that you are casting it in situations where you should be using a different spell, or that you are failing to exert enough tanking pressure on Team Monster (e.g. punishing them for target switching, walking through their OAs to smash their back line, being a really dangerous caster in general, etc). If you struggle with exerting pressure, I recommend taking Warcaster earlier, because then just your OA alone should be good value.

I think you over focus on level 20 skews class comparisons as the game is much more about the journey than the final destination.

To suggest that I just focus level 20 is... terribly inaccurate. Like, as inaccurate as when you said earlier in the thread that Hexblade's Curse scales with Charisma instead of proficiency and argued for multiple pages about the viability of Hexblade 1 dip vs Dragon Sorcerer 1 dip on that basis.

In actuality, I thoroughly test my builds (including this one) from level 1-20, against a wide array of challenges. I think pretty much anyone who follows my work would know that. And in my post I explained why, in my experience, it is strong at all levels.

Frogreaver

2020-09-19, 02:53 PM

TLDR: Frogreaver's Barbarian is a horrible tank and damage dealer, kinda tagging along at level 5 and then left forever behind in the dust doing very little of note.

So in melee against many small attacks, you don't use Shield. Against huge attacks and ranged, you might. Anyway, I'll play along with your premise, except I'll go to level 6

Fireball is an average of 27 damage pre save per target.

Young Bobo deals 4,5+4+2 = 10,5 average per attack that hits, or 21 DPR pre miss and crit chance.

With a rough estimation, I'll pretend that saves are about half the time so the average target for a fireball takes 75% damage or 20,25.

With miss and crit included (+4 modifier), Bobo is doing 14,1 DPR while raging (using LudicSavant's DPR calculator). With advantage that's 19,305 (but reckless attack wasn't your thing for this build IIRC).

In total: each target hit by a fireball is worth more than a round of Bobo attacking. I'd say 3-4 targets are pretty standard. 3 targets would be more than Bobo attacking for 4 rounds: standard combat length (actually a bit longer I think... Standard encounter is just about 3).

This is of course before adding in cantrips which would add another 7,7 DPR post miss chance (using Firebolt) and without the DPR from Armour of Agathys.

Anyway, for each of those two encounters where the Wizard has thrown a fireball he has earned post miss damage of 27,45 damage or 54,9 in total. More than 3 more rounds of Bobo attacking.

In the third encounter Bobo swings his pointy stick 4 times (in the third and last encounter with Rage), due to the excess damage from the prior two encounters the Wizard still comes out ahead using only cantrips with 29,3.

Now Bobo is less dangerous. He only deals 11.5 damage per round or 46 over the course of a 4 round combat. Wizard does 30,8 in the same amount of time, so he can just about go through combat 4 and 5 and would only end up behind Bobo with 1.1 damage.

Unfortunately for Bobo, young Wizzie is still spiffy with 2 level 2 slots and 1 level 3 slot and could utterly wreck the last encounter. Each shatter with 3 targets would do 30,375 damage and the fireball would still do 60,75 while 4 rounds of Bobo mania would be 46 - less than half.

If you run the same simulation at level 5, shatter upcast would need to hit 4 targets to do 54 damage (post saves), which would be 3,6 less than 4 rounds of Bobo attacking with rage. The two first combats would hence end with a 39 damage lead for the Wizard. Reduce the targets to 3 each time and you're looking at a lead of 12.

Next two combats the Wizard would do a combined damage of 2 x 53,475 (6 x cantrips + 2 x level 2 shatter) = 106,95 damage post saves, miss and crits.

Bobo would do 14.4 x 4 + 11.5 x 4 = 103.6.

He would hence be 15.35 behind by combat 5.

After combat 5, he'd be .15 behind and he'd end by being 15.05 ahead...

Unless we add a single target more to some of the shatters or any procs from AoA. From level 6 and onwards, there is no competition (if you felt there was one before that is). Bobo is left in the dust both in terms of damage and tankiness. If you adjust the the save percentage to something more realistic like 30-40% of the time, the results are even worse.

Your not even comparing AOE damage to single target accurately. The best estimate for AOE damage is that each enemy hit after the first results in a 50% discount to the damage that enemy takes. We can go into that why in another thread if you really want - but seems like that would be off topic here?

Dork_Forge

2020-09-19, 02:57 PM

Snipped for length

Just for the sake of a more impartial comparison:

-What Barbarian is this? I see a fully developed Wizard primary build, but talk of a generic Barbarian with no stated racial abilties and no obvious subclass abilities in play, clearly putting said Barbarian at a disadvantage
-I'm not sure why there's a damage calc as the central focus of this, but your simulations seem to assume multiple enemies for AOEs and no complications (it's an Abjurer, so party members in melee, enemy casters etc.)
-You said you'd take it one step further to level 6, coincidentally that one step further gives the Wizard Fireball and more slots, leaving the Barbarian with nothing but one additional rage and a subclass feature that seems MiA.
-For builds that seem to be centered around tanking, I haven't really seen that much about actually tanking (be it the durability kind or the mmo kind)

The conversation just seems to be stacked in one direction right now, even if the Barbarian is to lose here, it doesn't look like it should be such a gap.

Frogreaver

2020-09-19, 03:28 PM

In actuality, I thoroughly test my builds (including this one) from level 1-20, against a wide array of challenges. I think pretty much anyone who follows my work would know that. And in my post I explained why, in my experience, it is strong at all levels.

Will deal with the rest later. I said it was a nice build. I said nothing bad about your build. I said there were aspects of you were overvaluing and incorrectly comparing. One being a comparison to a generic barbarian that wasn't focused on taking damage. Something I'm not alone in noting. The other being that 1 hour long duration temp hp only have an impact on survivability when you are hit while having them. The point is that there is a trade off - if you are forgoing shield because you have armor of agathys temp hp up then you are forgoing a huge chunk of your builds effective hp. If you are using shield while having armor of agathys temp hp up then you have a greater chance of not benefitting from armor of agathys at all.

In terms of level 1-20, for someone that tests all levels of your builds you spend most of your time talking about the combos you can pull off at level 12+ and comparing to other builds in those level ranges.

LudicSavant

2020-09-19, 03:47 PM

The point is that there is a trade off - if you are forgoing shield because you have armor of agathys temp hp up then you are forgoing a huge chunk of your builds effective hp.

A chunk that wasn't even counted in the comparison where they were already far ahead.

You realize I stopped counting effective HP after using only a small fraction of my resources, and not counting the impact of Shield or superior AC or retribution damage or anything, right? Like, this is not a close comparison, here.

One being a comparison to a generic barbarian that wasn't focused on taking damage. A Half-Orc Bear-barian that takes reasonable ASIs for a tanking Barbarian like Max Str, Sentinel and Res(Wis).

Though a generic example would do just as well when we're establishing a difference in orders of magnitude. And Toughness (which is frankly a less practical choice for a tanking Barbarian than taking something like Res(Wis)) would not catch you up.

Skylivedk

2020-09-19, 03:59 PM

Just for the sake of a more impartial comparison:

-What Barbarian is this? I see a fully developed Wizard primary build, but talk of a generic Barbarian with no stated racial abilties and no obvious subclass abilities in play, clearly putting said Barbarian at a disadvantage
-I'm not sure why there's a damage calc as the central focus of this, but your simulations seem to assume multiple enemies for AOEs and no complications (it's an Abjurer, so party members in melee, enemy casters etc.)
-You said you'd take it one step further to level 6, coincidentally that one step further gives the Wizard Fireball and more slots, leaving the Barbarian with nothing but one additional rage and a subclass feature that seems MiA.
-For builds that seem to be centered around tanking, I haven't really seen that much about actually tanking (be it the durability kind or the mmo kind)

The conversation just seems to be stacked in one direction right now, even if the Barbarian is to lose here, it doesn't look like it should be such a gap.
Over 8 combats, I do presume you can hit 3-4 enemies per spell on average. IMX a lot more is possible over an adventuring day... And tbf, I actually also showed the level 5 comparison AND gave team monster a save buff. For most of the rest of your criticisms:

I was running with frogreaver's suggested build for Barbarian and slot allocation for Wizard, so that seems more than fair. Since FR had mentioned tanking, I presumed either AG or Totem. Variant human with Toughness was also FR's choice, not mine.

My entire point was that the choices suggested by FR were weak. In particular in build choices, but as such also the in play suggestions. That probably also contributes to the one-sidedness of my simulation. I thought, and think, one of the two suggestions was a horrible waste of space in a party. I've seen the other even prior to Eberron and AoA being added and know it's tanky as hell (DM'd for a Forge Cleric/Abjurer in Storm King's Thunder... Who was in a party with a Barbarian).

If you went for pure soaking the comparison would probably be better done with something along the lines of AoA upcast in the two level 3 slots. That would most probably also easily outdamage the suggested Barbarian since the retribution damage from one proc alone would be a round of attacking from Bobo and with Abjurer's ward you ought to be able to stretch that to a couple of hits easily.

@Frogreaver: what do you mean discount with 50% discount? Where did you find that methodology? I am comparing the damage accurately just not using whichever methodology you imply and which isn't natural, self-evident or objectively more accurate. If anything, I've been lenient with both saves and effected targets.

Dork_Forge

2020-09-19, 04:29 PM

Over 8 combats, I do presume you can hit 3-4 enemies per spell on average. IMX a lot more is possible over an adventuring day... And tbf, I actually also showed the level 5 comparison AND gave team monster a save buff. For most of the rest of your criticisms:

Shatter is a much smaller area than Fireball and targets a usually decent-strong monster save, assuming with any reliability not only that there is that many monsters in play, but that you can also hit them without catching your party in the cross fire seems... a stretch. After all the proposed Wizard has a 0 boost to initiative, giving ample chance for monsters to close on the party or vice versa.

I was running with frogreaver's suggested build for Barbarian and slot allocation for Wizard, so that seems more than fair. Since FR had mentioned tanking, I presumed either AG or Totem. Variant human with toughness was also FR's choice, not mine. My entire point was that the choices suggested by FR were weak. In particular in build choices, but as such also for in play

Weak... how? Weak at taking damage despite a Half Orc Bearbarian being one of the most durable damage takers in the game? Weak in terms of tanking strength even though the AG Barbarian can force disadvantage on attacking the rest of the party? If the Wizard is very difficult to hit, appears to take no damage when hit and injures the monster on a hit, what possible incentive does that monster have for persisting with attacking the Wizard? It only makes the other party members seem like easier, more promising targets. At the proposed level the Wizard isn't able to share their ward, but if they do, then they're tanking by handing over their own durability.

What this is primarily proving is that Wizards using AOE damage spells against encounters of 3+ monsters with no risk or regard to hitting party members do more damage (assuming you're not hitting a monster resistant to fire or whatever your damage of choice is of course). That doesn't seem relevant to 'tanking' unless you're operating on the principle that you have to meet x damage threshold or do the most damage in the party to be considered a threat over your party members. That seems like a flawed principle.

If your goal is to be very hard to take down, Tough gives more oomph for your investment than bumping Con, if the Barbarian is using armour then there's no reason to go Con over Tough if they're just looking for hp.

If you went for pure soaking the comparison would probably be better done with something along the lines of AoA upcast in the two level 3 slots. That would most probably also easily outdamage the suggested Barbarian since the retribution damage from one proc alone would be a round of attacking from Bobo and with Abjurer's ward you ought to be able to stretch that to a couple of hits easily.

I assume you mean soaking damage by what you said? Going with that I don't understand why you're talking about damage again, the aim of the build is not to do damage, it's to tank, AoA + Ward + high AC is nothing but a deterrent to a monster and counter productive to the tanking role unless you're fighting in a 5ft wide tunnel. Why should a monster stay and either keep failing or hurting itself when there's softer targets?

Frogreaver

2020-09-19, 05:57 PM

@Frogreaver: what do you mean discount with 50% discount? Where did you find that methodology? I am comparing the damage accurately just not using whichever methodology you imply and which isn't natural, self-evident or objectively more accurate. If anything, I've been lenient with both saves and effected targets.

I started a thread here for that very question. I think my OP there has answered your question but if you want more detail to dig into it I will be happy to provide there.

https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?619169-The-Impact-of-AOE-damage-vs-Single-Target-Damage

I assume you mean soaking damage by what you said? Going with that I don't understand why you're talking about damage again, the aim of the build is not to do damage, it's to tank, AoA + Ward + high AC is nothing but a deterrent to a monster and counter productive to the tanking role unless you're fighting in a 5ft wide tunnel. Why should a monster stay and either keep failing or hurting itself when there's softer targets?

In @Skylivedk's defense, I suggested that the proper comparison would be to have the cleric/wizard multiclass use enough resources to equal the barbarian in survivability. When doing so at level 5 I got that it took roughly 5-6 shield spells and that at this level armor of agathys was a worse effective hp buff than just using shield.

The question then becomes which build is better off after reaching that level of survivability. I believe it's pretty clear that at some point the stated cleric/wizard would overtake the barbarian in survivability and offensive power, but level 5 and below doesn't appear to be that point.

I mean it's not particularly hard for a class to out survive a barbarian if you ignore all other metrics. Consider that a life cleric can self heal for 142 hp using just cure wounds while having 20 AC. That's also clearly capable of being more survivable than a raging barbarian.

Skylivedk

2020-09-20, 02:38 AM

I started a thread here for that very question. I think my OP there has answered your question but if you want more detail to dig into it I will be happy to provide there.

https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?619169-The-Impact-of-AOE-damage-vs-Single-Target-Damage

In @Skylivedk's defense, I suggested that the proper comparison would be to have the cleric/wizard multiclass use enough resources to equal the barbarian in survivability. When doing so at level 5 I got that it took roughly 5-6 shield spells and that at this level armor of agathys was a worse effective hp buff than just using shield.

The question then becomes which build is better off after reaching that level of survivability. I believe it's pretty clear that at some point the stated cleric/wizard would overtake the barbarian in survivability and offensive power, but level 5 and below doesn't appear to be that point.

I mean it's not particularly hard for a class to out survive a barbarian if you ignore all other metrics. Consider that a life cleric can self heal for 142 hp using just cure wounds while having 20 AC. That's also clearly capable of being more survivable than a raging barbarian.
I've seen the other thread and I thank you for taking the time to explain your point. I don't fully agree with it, but that can be it for the other thread. In terms of tanking and control, if we change to using a "remove turns" metric, the Cleric/Wizard will quite often be better off using other spells (Web, Hypnotic Pattern, Slow), but I tried to make the comparison simpler. If you want better AoOs then Warcaster at 4 or 8 is a possibility. IMO, Barbarians are just not that hard to deal with and do way better when they deal a ton of damage, because then they at least require some kind of attention, than when they go Sword and Board where they are just too little of a threat to be worth really focusing on.

I don't see how you reach the conclusion of level 5 not having been that moment either. With Abjurer's ward and upcast AoA plus using control spells/concentration spells (and hence incentivizing team monster to hit him more), I'd much rather have a Forge/Wiz at level 5 as my tank than an S&B Barbarian. I still don't see why Team Monster would bother with the Barbarian at this point. Your argument for the Barbarian being more offensive and/or defensive is yet to be backed up with any kind of numbers, examples or rational arguments. It is just a statement at this point in time. That he also adds less out of combat is completely ignored. The simulation didn't use Help from Familiar, no use of Unseen Servant, no use of control spells and not even a SCAGtrip, and still the Barbarian failed to impress. What is it that I am not seeing?

By the way: I forgot one more Rage for the Barbarian in the level 6 scenario... He would still have been blown out the water, but slightly less so.

LudicSavant

2020-09-20, 11:16 AM

When doing so at level 5 I got that it took roughly 5-6 shield spells

I think it'd be helpful for you to show your work so that it can be checked. Especially since each time I've seen you do so in this thread so far there has been some major error -- missing erratas, leaving out proficiency, saying things scale with a stat they don't scale with, etc. You might be overlooking something.

Now naturally, most comparisons require some degree of abstraction and inexactitude in order to be done at all. But Barbarians are often particularly prone to being blown out of proportion by orders of magnitude in oversimplified white room analysis, via the following methods:
1) Ignoring accuracy when calculating damage, especially for GWM builds.
2) Only measuring one kind of defense, while dumping your ability to deal with any other kind of situation (which I call 'building Achilles'). If you're in a game where the enemy isn't just pulling their punches, a defense tends to only be as strong as its weakest link.
3) Leaving out the need to have a presence on the battlefield and defend allies (which I call 'making a turtle rather than a tank')
4) Assuming 100% rage uptime even at low levels. Remember, if you're doing 6+ encounters, you rage for half or less of them. And even in those encounters, Rage isn't up until your turn (this doesn't get solved until level 7 with Feral Instinct, and is subject to interruption (doubly so if one is 'building Achilles').

So if/when you show your work, I would recommend avoiding doing any of the above.

Anyways, all of that said, my expectation would be that Barbarian makes its best showing in Tier 1 and early Tier 2.

Christew

2020-09-20, 11:37 AM

The other being that 1 hour long duration temp hp only have an impact on survivability when you are hit while having them. The point is that there is a trade off - if you are forgoing shield because you have armor of agathys temp hp up then you are forgoing a huge chunk of your builds effective hp. If you are using shield while having armor of agathys temp hp up then you have a greater chance of not benefitting from armor of agathys at all.
I don't really understand treating these as mutually exclusive options. AoA costs an action and has an hour duration making it an ideal pre-combat buff. Shield costs a reaction and lasts until your next turn, making it an ideal panic button. They fill completely different situations and don't really step on each other's toes unless you use them in a very specifically unoptimized fashion.

A hypothetical ogre and it's goblin lackeys appear. AoA mitigates hits from the goblins while dealing effective damage to them. If the ogre gets a hit on you, pop shield. A few goblin hits might get blocked for that turn, but that's pretty negligible in the overall combat, let alone the adventuring day.

I mean, even "worst" case scenario, where the monsters decide not to attack you at all ... Great! This is a wizard we are talking about. If there was a concentration free buff that made it so enemies only attack your allies instead of you, it would be the rare wizard not drooling over the prospect.

Dork_Forge

2020-09-20, 12:23 PM

I mean, even "worst" case scenario, where the monsters decide not to attack you at all ... Great! This is a wizard we are talking about. If there was a concentration free buff that made it so enemies only attack your allies instead of you, it would be the rare wizard not drooling over the prospect.

I think the important thing here is context, this was not about individual survivability (at least I don't think it was), it was about tanking (with multiple references to why monsters should care about you). The pairing of high AC+Shield+Ward+AoA is great for individual survivability, but it's terrible for tanking. What reason should a monster have for attempting to kill something that it either can't hit, or rarely hits and does no visible damage to whilst also hurting itself? Sure the Wizard is doing stuff, but so are the other (presumably easier targets) party members.

So this would be good for the typical Wizarding role (blasting, control etc.) but not good for someone looking to draw the aggro of the other side.

Skylivedk

2020-09-20, 12:29 PM

I think the important thing here is context, this was not about individual survivability (at least I don't think it was), it was about tanking (with multiple references to why monsters should care about you). The pairing of high AC+Shield+Ward+AoA is great for individual survivability, but it's terrible for tanking. What reason should a monster have for attempting to kill something that it either can't hit, or rarely hits and does no visible damage to whilst also hurting itself? Sure the Wizard is doing stuff, but so are the other (presumably easier targets) party members.

So this would be good for the typical Wizarding role (blasting, control etc.) but not good for someone looking to draw the aggro of the other side.

Which is why I went through the trouble of showing that the Wizard is a bigger threat than the Barbarian. Especially if you don't focus on doing damage, but actually do all the other things. Also some strong control spells are way better close (Fear, Counterspell) rather than far away.

LudicSavant

2020-09-20, 12:54 PM

I don't really understand treating these as mutually exclusive options. AoA costs an action and has an hour duration making it an ideal pre-combat buff. Shield costs a reaction and lasts until your next turn, making it an ideal panic button. They fill completely different situations and don't really step on each other's toes unless you use them in a very specifically unoptimized fashion.

You have the right of it here. AoA and Shield should not be stepping on each others' toes if used correctly. If anything, the opposite.

Xetheral

2020-09-20, 01:07 PM

And all of that is before we even mention Spell Mastery, which just lets you regenerate your ward forever and have infinite Shield/Blur (or whatever other combo you want). Before that, you can convert time into ward hp with Alarm rituals.

Quick question: for using Spell Mastery (Shield) to recharge the ward between battles, are you assuming the DM is permitting the other party members to repeatedly attack you with non-damaging attacks to trigger Shield (e.g. nets, unarmed attacks from 8 STR characters)? If so, that seems like assuming an awfully high tolerance for cheese at the table. And if not, I would expect the actual HP loss from the occasional (and inevitable) hit/crit during the sparing to drastically reduce the survivability value of recharging the ward. (Although it may still be worth it in a pinch--ward points for this character are likely more valuable than HP.)

Dork_Forge

2020-09-20, 01:22 PM

Which is why I went through the trouble of showing that the Wizard is a bigger threat than the Barbarian. Especially if you don't focus on doing damage, but actually do all the other things. Also some strong control spells are way better close (Fear, Counterspell) rather than far away.

You're assuming that the monsters will realise you are a threat but not realise that you are the hardest target to actually injure. That is a leap of logic, especially as there is likely martials in melee range, also doing damage and more easily hit. To assume that the monsters would forgo everyone else (closer, easier targets) to attack you for negative pay off (little to no hits and self damage on a hit) is biased logic. If the mosnter pays attention to pain, why shouldn't it reason otherwise? Or what if the monster is intelligent period? The best way to take down a party isn't to drop the hardest target, it's to go for the weakest and work your way up, dropping the action economy acnd creating a death spiral.

I uphold the build is good at survivability but poor at actually tanking in the sense of drawing aggro, unless the monsters operate on a specific and very favourable point of view.

Skylivedk

2020-09-20, 01:45 PM

Christew

2020-09-20, 02:13 PM

I uphold the build is good at survivability but poor at actually tanking in the sense of drawing aggro, unless the monsters operate on a specific and very favourable point of view.
I think the distinction between survivability and tanking is worth making, but I also think LudicSavant's build is viable for tanking.

If you are in melee (the build is perfectly capable of using SCAG-trips AFAIK) and you are running Fear, Hypnotic Pattern, Web, etc, why on Earth would monsters rather target the Barbarian proposed by Frogreaver, or most Martials for that sake? You've locked down maybe 60-70% of their squad. Wouldn't you be an obvious high priority threat? I don't follow your reasoning in the slightest. Wizards draw aggro, not because they are squishy, but because they're dangerous.

You are a wizard. You are dangerous*. You are super hard to ignore and if they do ignore you, odds are that your team has an easier time winning as you lay down top-tier spells arrive you have, y'know, the best spell list in the game

*Dangerous and squishy is of course tastier.
This. If we are positing stupid adversaries, they should be attacking the weakest looking combatant or the most immediate threat. If we are positing intelligent adversaries, they should be attacking the most significant threat. The Wizard can check either box.

What exactly would a Barbarian (of whatever subclass and build) be doing that is a comparable threat to a Wizard with a concentration effect, blasting, a familiar, etc? Especially given that a single hit might disrupt the Wizard while it is going to take a whole lot of hits to interrupt the Barbarian. The potency of threat to ease of disruption just doesn't incentivize attacking the barbarian unless absolutely necessary.

Another great build btw, Ludic.

Dork_Forge

2020-09-20, 03:09 PM

If you are in melee (the build is perfectly capable of using SCAG-trips AFAIK) and you are running Fear, Hypnotic Pattern, Web, etc, why on Earth would monsters rather target the Barbarian proposed by Frogreaver, or most Martials for that sake? You've locked down maybe 60-70% of their squad. Wouldn't you be an obvious high priority threat? I don't follow your reasoning in the slightest. Wizards draw aggro, not because they are squishy, but because they're dangerous.

You are a wizard. You are dangerous*. You are super hard to ignore and if they do ignore you, odds are that your team has an easier time winning as you lay down top-tier spells arrive you have, y'know, the best spell list in the game

*Dangerous and squishy is of course tastier.

The Wizard in question may draw aggro, but there's no good reason for you to keep the monster's aggro. Afterall, it's very difficult to hit you, hits inflict self daamge and show no visible damage to the Wizard (temp hp and Ward). Meanwhile the Wizard presents nothing but benefit to the monsters in attacking others, an AG (and Cavalier etc.) can inflict disadvantage on attacking other targets, that incentivises to some degree attacking the one person you won't be at disadvantage to.

This also assumes that the Wizard is the biggest threat, this build has to make concessions to be how it is: majorly delayed Int progression and some delayed spell progression means that another single classes full caster (even another Wizard) is likely to pose a bigger threat, like a Cleric with Spirit Guardians up when the proposed build doesn't have 3rd level spells yet (this exists every other level, this is just an obvious example). So that best spell list in the game is behind the curve in two fashions and if the monster ignores you, then actually chances are they're attacking a much softer target. This gets worse with intelligent monsters, not better.

This. If we are positing stupid adversaries, they should be attacking the weakest looking combatant or the most immediate threat. If we are positing intelligent adversaries, they should be attacking the most significant threat. The Wizard can check either box.

What exactly would a Barbarian (of whatever subclass and build) be doing that is a comparable threat to a Wizard with a concentration effect, blasting, a familiar, etc? Especially given that a single hit might disrupt the Wizard while it is going to take a whole lot of hits to interrupt the Barbarian. The potency of threat to ease of disruption just doesn't incentivize attacking the barbarian unless absolutely necessary.

That logic seems a bit flawed, the most intelligent way to take apart a party is just to deprive it of members as quickly as possible, as action economy shifts and there are less targets to divide attacks amongst, the chance of failure increases, it's the whole reason a death spiral is a thing.

If you were to target a specific member for a particular reason with the end goal being to take down the party, would you not be better suited to go for the weakest member or the healer?

For the record I have not evaluated this as these two builds being in the same party, I thought this was meant to be contrasting them, having both this Wizard and an AG in a party would be nothing but a good thing.

Christew

2020-09-20, 03:33 PM

That logic seems a bit flawed, the most intelligent way to take apart a party is just to deprive it of members as quickly as possible, as action economy shifts and there are less targets to divide attacks amongst, the chance of failure increases, it's the whole reason a death spiral is a thing.
I would posit that (generally speaking) the most intelligent way to take apart a group of foes would be to start with the most potent threat that is most easily disrupted and work your way down from there.

IF you were to target a specific member for a particular reason with the end goal being to take down the party, would you not be better suited to go for the weakest member or the healer?
Raises an interesting point about foe knowledge. I assume enemies don't usually have foreknowledge of a character's abilities. Steel Wizard dumped strength and has mostly wizard hit dice and so could be termed weakest. Steel Wizard also has access to Healing Word and Cure Wounds and could be termed healer. Really a tough call to make without contextual info (party comp, level, prepared spells, etc).

Skylivedk

2020-09-20, 04:00 PM

The Wizard in question may draw aggro, but there's no good reason for you to keep the monster's aggro. Afterall, it's very difficult to hit you, hits inflict self daamge and show no visible damage to the Wizard (temp hp and Ward). Meanwhile the Wizard presents nothing but benefit to the monsters in attacking others, an AG (and Cavalier etc.) can inflict disadvantage on attacking other targets, that incentivises to some degree attacking the one person you won't be at disadvantage to.

This also assumes that the Wizard is the biggest threat, this build has to make concessions to be how it is: majorly delayed Int progression and some delayed spell progression means that another single classes full caster (even another Wizard) is likely to pose a bigger threat, like a Cleric with Spirit Guardians up when the proposed build doesn't have 3rd level spells yet (this exists every other level, this is just an obvious example). So that best spell list in the game is behind the curve in two fashions and if the monster ignores you, then actually chances are they're attacking a much softer target. This gets worse with intelligent monsters, not better.

That logic seems a bit flawed, the most intelligent way to take apart a party is just to deprive it of members as quickly as possible, as action economy shifts and there are less targets to divide attacks amongst, the chance of failure increases, it's the whole reason a death spiral is a thing.

If you were to target a specific member for a particular reason with the end goal being to take down the party, would you not be better suited to go for the weakest member or the healer?

For the record I have not evaluated this as these two builds being in the same party, I thought this was meant to be contrasting them, having both this Wizard and an AG in a party would be nothing but a good thing.
FWIW, I'd probably take Int or Warcaster prior to Res: Con if I were to play the Steel Forge Wizard (with high AC and Con I wouldn't be too afraid of losing concentration and the prof bonus is worth more later).

The Wizard can still inflict disadvantage with web, inflict advantage on hits against monster with a bunch of spells and control movement and areas with another range of spells. I honestly don't see how you arrive at the conclusion that it's not tempting to get rid of the tin can that lights the room on fire (create bonfire/flaming sphere), covers it in grease/web, etc.

The Wizard ought to have enough ways to be a hard to ignore nuisance.

Of course YMMV.

LudicSavant

2020-09-20, 04:00 PM

I think the distinction between survivability and tanking is worth making, but I also think LudicSavant's build is viable for tanking.

This. If we are positing stupid adversaries, they should be attacking the weakest looking combatant or the most immediate threat. If we are positing intelligent adversaries, they should be attacking the most significant threat. The Wizard can check either box.

What exactly would a Barbarian (of whatever subclass and build) be doing that is a comparable threat to a Wizard with a concentration effect, blasting, a familiar, etc? Especially given that a single hit might disrupt the Wizard while it is going to take a whole lot of hits to interrupt the Barbarian. The potency of threat to ease of disruption just doesn't incentivize attacking the barbarian unless absolutely necessary.

Another great build btw, Ludic.

Thanks!

I'll add that it's not just a matter of dishing out damage, but control as well. In many circumstances, I don't allow enemies a choice of who to target. Or at least, not any good choices.

The Steel Wizard also has tools to help protect their allies even if they're the ones that end up getting attacked, too. They can project ward, pick up off death gate as a bonus action, counterspell unusually well, transform people into giant apes with 150-odd temp HP, that kind of thing.

You also can shift seamlessly into using all of your would-be defensive resources to offensive or support ones.

Dork_Forge

2020-09-20, 04:32 PM

I would posit that (generally speaking) the most intelligent way to take apart a group of foes would be to start with the most potent threat that is most easily disrupted and work your way down from there.

Raises an interesting point about foe knowledge. I assume enemies don't usually have foreknowledge of a character's abilities. Steel Wizard dumped strength and has mostly wizard hit dice and so could be termed weakest. Steel Wizard also has access to Healing Word and Cure Wounds and could be termed healer. Really a tough call to make without contextual info (party comp, level, prepared spells, etc).

The key there is the easily disrupted part, defense is the strongest suit of the build.

Foreknowledge isn't even needed really, the Wizard is wearing plate and carrying a shield, both are signs of being harder to injure and both are things not expected of a Wizard. Whilst they have access to it, I find it hard to believe the Wizard would be using Cure Wounds in combat at all, but I imagine someone is taking on the role of healer more actively (in most parties ime, obviously varies).

I'm sure there's games where the monsters would just continue to try and chew on the Wizard despite reason and pain, but I don't think it's reasonable to rely on that.

FWIW, I'd probably take Int or Warcaster prior to Res: Con if I were to play the Steel Forge Wizard (with high AC and Con I wouldn't be too afraid of losing concentration and the prof bonus is worth more later).

The Wizard can still inflict disadvantage with web, inflict advantage on hits against monster with a bunch of spells and control movement and areas with another range of spells. I honestly don't see how you arrive at the conclusion that it's not tempting to get rid of the tin can that lights the room on fire (create bonfire/flaming sphere), covers it in grease/web, etc.

The Wizard ought to have enough ways to be a hard to ignore nuisance.

Of course YMMV.

I'd agree with that being a better course of action, probably Int for my money, a +3 stat on a prepared caster until level 9 wouldn't be great.

This isn't the same, both of my examples give disadvantage for not attacking the Tank, being at disadvantage from Web equally affects the whole party. Otherwise I'd like some examples because you're just saying 'spells can do these things.'

Again, the Wizard is likely to gain the attention of the monsters, but there's no good reason for the Wizard to keep it, especially against intelligent enemies. The entire party is doing their best to fight the monsters, single classesd casters can be throwing higher level spells with higher bonuses/DCs at them, martials doing damage and conditions etc. The Wizard being so hard to put down is great for survivability, but it actively goes against keeping aggro.

Skylivedk

2020-09-20, 04:58 PM

The key there is the easily disrupted part, defense is the strongest suit of the build.

Foreknowledge isn't even needed really, the Wizard is wearing plate and carrying a shield, both are signs of being harder to injure and both are things not expected of a Wizard. Whilst they have access to it, I find it hard to believe the Wizard would be using Cure Wounds in combat at all, but I imagine someone is taking on the role of healer more actively (in most parties ime, obviously varies).

I'm sure there's games where the monsters would just continue to try and chew on the Wizard despite reason and pain, but I don't think it's reasonable to rely on that.

I'd agree with that being a better course of action, probably Int for my money, a +3 stat on a prepared caster until level 9 wouldn't be great.

This isn't the same, both of my examples give disadvantage for not attacking the Tank, being at disadvantage from Web equally affects the whole party. Otherwise I'd like some examples because you're just saying 'spells can do these things.'

Again, the Wizard is likely to gain the attention of the monsters, but there's no good reason for the Wizard to keep it, especially against intelligent enemies. The entire party is doing their best to fight the monsters, single classesd casters can be throwing higher level spells with higher bonuses/DCs at them, martials doing damage and conditions etc. The Wizard being so hard to put down is great for survivability, but it actively goes against keeping aggro.

Disadvantage to hit/advantage to being hit are both granted by both grease and web, depending on function. Protection from Evil and Good can fulfill some of the same and so can Guiding Bolt. Heck, even Bless can make you worth hitting. So can yo-yo healing, your unseen servant spreading environmental hazards, your owl creating advantage with flyby and probably a bunch of other things I don't recall some minutes to midnight.

I don't get how you can say that you don't keep aggro with concentration effects. It's way better than most Martials (AG and Cavalier having good mechanics). Concentration spells are by themselves a way to keep aggro. With the right spell, the opponents are either at a severe disadvantage (small d) or attacking you.

Damned if they do, damned if they don't. This also applies to potentially way more targets than AG (only one target!) or Cavalier can target (they have to stay within 5 feet and you only have one reaction, and ranged attackers can just kill your squishies). Tbf, it isn't even close in my eyes.

Christew

2020-09-20, 05:06 PM

LudicSavant

2020-09-20, 05:23 PM

Christew

2020-09-20, 06:24 PM

I was really torn about the ASI order for the Steel Wizard, since I think any order of Int / Warcaster / Res(Con) is a solid choice and would generally decide based on factors like party composition and nature of the campaign.
Always a conundrum with wizard theorycraft. Personally, I appreciate that you always walk through your thinking for a specific build instead of just saying "take these three in whatever order best fits."

I always find it hard to delay rounding out an odd CON score, but with a build like this that could easily frontline, Warcaster becomes more viable than I usually consider it. I think your description and the variant section were more than adequate.

Frogreaver

2020-09-20, 06:51 PM

You're assuming that the monsters will realise you are a threat but not realise that you are the hardest target to actually injure. That is a leap of logic, especially as there is likely martials in melee range, also doing damage and more easily hit. To assume that the monsters would forgo everyone else (closer, easier targets) to attack you for negative pay off (little to no hits and self damage on a hit) is biased logic. If the mosnter pays attention to pain, why shouldn't it reason otherwise? Or what if the monster is intelligent period? The best way to take down a party isn't to drop the hardest target, it's to go for the weakest and work your way up, dropping the action economy acnd creating a death spiral.

I uphold the build is good at survivability but poor at actually tanking in the sense of drawing aggro, unless the monsters operate on a specific and very favourable point of view.

Yep, you've done a good job talking about the drawing aggro part of tanking. I've focused primarily on the survivability. But you are absolutely right, being too defensive actually hurts tanking capabilities, even if your offensive abilities are a bit higher.

The funniest thing about this is, by some level the cleric/wizard does become more survivable. I've no where disputed that. It's also funny to note that a life cleric is also more survivable than the most survivable barbarian. Not necessarily good at drawing aggro though.

Which is why I went through the trouble of showing that the Wizard is a bigger threat than the Barbarian. Especially if you don't focus on doing damage, but actually do all the other things. Also some strong control spells are way better close (Fear, Counterspell) rather than far away.

At level 5 the Cleric/Wizard doesn't even have those spells. He has shatter or web. Are you suggesting that a wizard who casts web and follows up with cantrips (not even once per encounter) is a bigger threat than a sword and shield barbarian making 2 attacks?

I think it'd be helpful for you to show your work so that it can be checked. Especially since each time you have done so in this thread so far there has been some major error -- missing erratas, leaving out proficiency, saying things scale with a stat they don't scale with, etc.

No bigger errors than you taking the most liberal interpretations of abilities - such as the Wizard's empowered evocation applying more than once to magic missile damage.

Now naturally, most comparisons require some degree of abstraction and inexactitude in order to be done at all. But Barbarians are often particularly prone to being blown out of proportion by orders of magnitude in oversimplified white room analysis, via the following methods:

An overall principle we can agree with.

1) Ignoring accuracy when calculating damage, especially for GWM builds.

I've never seen anyone do this. The most common inaccuracy I see in GWM damage comparisons is giving the GWM advantage but not the non-GWM alternative build.

I'd say a far more common and more important error is direct comparisons of AOE damage to single target damage.

2) Only measuring one kind of defense, while dumping your ability to deal with any other kind of situation (which I call 'building Achilles'). If you're in a game where the enemy isn't just pulling their punches, a defense tends to only be as strong as its weakest link.

This one gets pretty abstract pretty fast and has so many factors.

I'll leave it at this, in terms of building Achilles', every character has weaknesses. It's impossible to cover everything - especially from levels 1-10. In terms of survivability the most important features tend to be (in no particular order):

AC
HP
Temp Hp
Damage Resistances
Imposing Disadvantage on attacks against you
Dex and Con saves
Str saves if often in melee
Healing
Damage Reduction

3) Leaving out the need to have a presence on the battlefield (which I call 'making a turtle rather than a tank')

A cleric/wizard using most slots for survivability and having a handful left for offensive spells and using cantrips on 80% of their turns doesn't scream "battlefield presence" to me.

4) Assuming 100% rage uptime even at low levels. Remember, if you're doing 6+ encounters, you rage for half or less of them. And even in those encounters, Rage isn't up until your turn (this doesn't get solved until level 7 with Feral Instinct, and is subject to interruption (doubly so if one is 'building Achilles').

I personally don't play 6+ encounters per day. More like 1-3 on most days. That said we can theory craft around any number. It's just important to remember those encounters are rarely uniform in difficulty. If the Barbarian rages in the hardest but not the easiest that's significantly better than the proposals i've seen to handle that situation.

So if/when you show your work, I would recommend avoiding doing any of the above.

Anyways, all of that said, my expectation would be that Barbarian makes its best showing in Tier 1 and early Tier 2.

Maybe that's because Barbarian 7-19 tends to be fairly lackluster. Much more can be gained by multiclassing the Barbarian both in terms of offense and survivability.

LudicSavant

2020-09-20, 07:56 PM

No bigger errors than you taking the most liberal interpretations of abilities - such as the Wizard's empowered evocation applying more than once to magic missile damage.

This got old pages ago.

Telling you what Sage Advice (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/557820938402947072) says is not an error. Like... at all. If you don't want to interpret it that way, that's up to you, but it is in no way an error.

Spending multiple pages arguing about the Hexblade being 'not that good a dip compared to Sorcerer 1' because 'Hexblade's Curse scales its damage with Charisma, not Proficiency' is a major error. Like there is no possible interpretation of the book, liberal or otherwise, where that's true. And that is far from the only example of this sort of thing.

If you're not going to show your work and you are just going to say 'no you,' then we have nothing more to discuss. You've been doing this since page 1, and I just don't have any more time to spend on it. Have a nice day sir.

Frogreaver

2020-09-20, 08:23 PM

This got old pages ago.

Telling you what the books says and what Sage Advice (https://twitter.com/jeremyecrawford/status/774030989894955008?lang=en) says is not an error. Like... at all. If you don't want to interpret it that way, that's up to you, but it is in no way an error.

Spending multiple pages arguing about the Hexblade being 'not that good a dip' because 'Hexblade's Curse scales its damage with Charisma, not Proficiency' is a major error. Like there is no possible interpretation of the book, liberal or otherwise, where that's true. And that is far from the only example of this sort of thing.

If you're not going to show your work and you are just going to say 'no you,' then we have nothing more to discuss. You've been doing this since page 1, and I just don't have any more time to spend on it. Have a nice day sir.

How many times have you went back to the Hexblade's curse not being cha and me being mixed up on that, to try and silence me on completely unrelated topics?

LudicSavant

2020-09-20, 08:30 PM

How many times have you went back to the Hexblade's curse not being cha and me being mixed up on that, to try and silence me on completely unrelated topics?

"I think it'd be helpful for you to show your work so that it can be checked" is not "silencing you." I had literally the exact opposite intention.

Frogreaver

2020-09-20, 08:33 PM

"I think it'd be helpful for you to show your work so that it can be checked" is not "silencing you."

I'll be happy to as long as you show yours too.

Christew

2020-09-20, 08:42 PM

How many times have you went back to the Hexblade's curse not being cha and me being mixed up on that, to try and silence me on completely unrelated topics?
This is a really disappointing attitude man. She has in no way tried to silence you, and that mistake of yours genuinely derailed this thread for pages. Remember when you said this?

LOL, such a noob mistake!

That changes things considerably!
This quote made me think that you were genuinely contrite about a mistake. That made you seem genuine and still worth listening to (even if I disagree with your base premise).

I'll be happy to as long as you show yours too.
Um, she literally wrote the most effective DPR calculator and is a consistently valuable contributor to this board as a whole. Also, the only times she has neglected to show her work is on topics that she has already written extensively on.

Frogreaver

2020-09-20, 08:53 PM

This is a really disappointing attitude man. She has in no way tried to silence you, and that mistake of yours genuinely derailed this thread for pages. Remember when you said this?

I don't know about you but when a past mistake is continually brought up again and again into other topics of conversation... well I'm not sure how else to take that.

This quote made me think that you were genuinely contrite about a mistake. That made you seem genuine and still worth listening to (even if I disagree with your base premise).

Meant every word. Now maybe you can help explain why that is being brought up again and again and again?

Um, she literally wrote the most effective DPR calculator and is a consistently valuable contributor to this board as a whole. Also, the only times she has neglected to show her work is on topics that she has already written extensively on.

That's good to know about the DPR calculator. That's something I will check out at some point.

Christew

2020-09-20, 09:34 PM

I don't know about you but when a past mistake is continually brought up again and again into other topics of conversation... well I'm not sure how else to take that.
I totally get that, it is definitely frustrating to have an error repeatedly brought up when you would rather move past it. The issue is that you didn't make a typo or a slip of the tongue; you were arguing (rather vehemently and for quite some time) based on an incorrect understanding of a rule that came out years ago. That becomes a credibility issue when the topic is multiclass optimization. This board is welcoming to D&D enthusiasts of any and all levels of experience, but it also features a considerable number of folks who have studied and dissected 5e theory, mechanics, and optimization from before its formal inception through every new publication, UA, and Crawford tweet. LudicSavant's credentials are pretty much above reproach (I genuinely recommend you do the reading on her contributions here, it is worth the time and effort). Not speaking for her, but just from observation of her discussion style, she seems to welcome discussion and dissection of her builds and theories. That said, you made an egregious error that demonstrated a less than full understanding of the currently published rules. You deserve credit for your (previously quoted) mature and productive response to being called out on a misinformed position, but you also have to own that you made a pretty big gaff and that it is reasonable for people to ask for a higher burden of proof from you as a result.

That's good to know about the DPR calculator. That's something I will check out at some point.
Good on. I genuinely recommend it.

Frogreaver

2020-09-20, 09:56 PM

I totally get that, it is definitely frustrating to have an error repeatedly brought up when you would rather move past it. The issue is that you didn't make a typo or a slip of the tongue; you were arguing (rather vehemently and for quite some time) based on an incorrect understanding of a rule that came out years ago.

There's no reason to keep bringing it up though. That's the problem. It's not like anyone's been discussing hexblade for some time. I've moved on. Why aren't you all?

That becomes a credibility issue when the topic is multiclass optimization.

How so? How does 1 misremembered rule that I immediately owned up when it was brought up make for a credibility issue on how solid one's ability to analyze the game and various builds are? Is that really how this board operates, be wrong once and you have no credibility and have to jump through hoops to everyone elses satisfaction?

This board is welcoming to D&D enthusiasts of any and all levels of experience, but it also features a considerable number of folks who have studied and dissected 5e theory, mechanics, and optimization from before its formal inception through every new publication, UA, and Crawford tweet. LudicSavant's credentials are pretty much above reproach (I genuinely recommend you do the reading on her contributions here, it is worth the time and effort). Not speaking for her, but just from observation of her discussion style, she seems to welcome discussion and dissection of her builds and theories.

From an outside perspective, that's not how it comes across.

That said, you made an egregious error that demonstrated a less than full understanding of the currently published rules.

Misremembering 1 thing is not making an egregious error that demonstrates a less than full understanding of the currently published rules. Sorry but we are on different planets there. Overall I like this board, but if that's how such things are going to be treated then I'm not sure this is a place I'm going to be happy.

You deserve credit for your (previously quoted) mature and productive response to being called out on a misinformed position, but you also have to own that you made a pretty big gaff and that it is reasonable for people to ask for a higher burden of proof from you as a result.

In my humble opinion, Having that expectation and that view about misremembering 1 rule is what is unreasonable.

Christew

2020-09-20, 11:10 PM

There's no reason to keep bringing it up though. That's the problem. It's not like anyone's been discussing hexblade for some time. I've moved on. Why aren't you all?
First, let's not throw around generalizations, this is the first I've mentioned your mistake or Hexblade at all. Second, as I said before, it is a question of credibility. Your mistake regarding Hexblade made it appear as though you have not done your homework on the nuances of the 5e ruleset. That calls into question your ability to offer informed critique on someone who very much has done their homework. If a doctor spent several days telling me that a particular medication had no detrimental interactions with my condition only to later admit that they had made a mistake, few could blame me for questioning that doctors medical expertise moving forward. No one has brought up Hexblade to shame you, only to ask for the math behind your claims.

How so? How does 1 misremembered rule that I immediately owned up when it was brought up make for a credibility issue on how solid one's ability to analyze the game and various builds are? Is that really how this board operates, be wrong once and you have no credibility and have to jump through hoops to everyone elses satisfaction?
Well, let's be fair -- you didn't "immediately" own up to it. You defended your mistaken claim for pages of discussion (while LudicSavant was very patient with you). Not having a clear understanding of the math behind the rules does limit your credibility on analyzing builds. No one initially shamed you for that mistake. No one is currently shaming you for that mistake. But making such a mistake does entitle others to ask for more detailed support of your claims because it has shown that they cannot take your rules knowledge as a given. Again, please don't jump to broad generalizations. You cannot judge this board off of a single interaction in a single thread. That said, on any given subject there will be those that are learning and those that are teaching (best case scenario people will be both simultaneously). Personally, I think that this thread has largely been a testament to the GitP community. You have people on your side and you have people on the other side. The discussion has been civil and productive.

From an outside perspective, that's not how it comes across.
I'm sorry to hear that. I think you could be a valuable member of this community. You obviously have a passion for the subject and have been very active in the past couple weeks. That said, I don't think it is unreasonable to say that you have come in a little hot on a couple subjects (this is not the only thread where I've seen you butt heads with LudicSavant specifically). Passion is great, unwillingness to listen to the opinions of others is not. The goal here is discussion. That often entails disagreement, but ideally shouldn't entail offense on either side of a given issue.

Misremembering 1 thing is not making an egregious error that demonstrates a less than full understanding of the currently published rules. Sorry but we are on different planets there. Overall I like this board, but if that's how such things are going to be treated then I'm not sure this is a place I'm going to be happy.
I'm sorry that we are so far apart. I can't speak for others, but for me: 1)Hexblade has been one of the most hotly discussed topics in 5e since its publication, 2) you ardently defended a basic misreading of a level 1 Hexblade ability, 3) given 1 and 2, it is not a great leap to ask for evidence that you are not basing your subsequent claims on further possible misreadings. It is not unreasonable for LudicSavant to feel that her time is being wasted engaging in a long form argument with someone that is basing their claims on at least one and possibly more misreadings of the text. You are 100% entitled to post/ask/discuss whatever you want on this board (within the rules of conduct of course). Others are 100% entitled to respond (or decide they no longer see the value in responding) to your posts/etc as they see fit.

In my humble opinion, Having that expectation and that view about misremembering 1 rule is what is unreasonable.
You are getting very hung up on this 1 rule thing. Maybe go back and look at how many times you defended your mistaken interpretation of that 1 rule, what tone you used up until you realized you were wrong, and how people on the board responded. To my eyes your opinions were treated respectfully and with the aim of improving your understanding. It was only when you became standoffish regarding a reasonable reaction to misinformed critique that LudicSavant (reasonably and respectfully) decided this wasn't worth her time. No one is saying you need to have an encyclopedic understanding of the rules.

Skylivedk

2020-09-21, 12:29 AM

Yep, you've done a good job talking about the drawing aggro part of tanking. I've focused primarily on the survivability. But you are absolutely right, being too defensive actually hurts tanking capabilities, even if your offensive abilities are a bit higher.

The funniest thing about this is, by some level the cleric/wizard does become more survivable. I've no where disputed that. It's also funny to note that a life cleric is also more survivable than the most survivable barbarian. Not necessarily good at drawing aggro though.

Without acknowledging that there's multiple ways of drawing aggro though. Being a continuous threat IS a way of drawing aggro and the most normal in games with no forced aggro mechanic

At level 5 the Cleric/Wizard doesn't even have those spells. He has shatter or web. Are you suggesting that a wizard who casts web and follows up with cantrips (not even once per encounter) is a bigger threat than a sword and shield barbarian making 2 attacks?
Absolutely. I even showed how the Barbarian is behind in pure damage for most of five combats if the Cleric/Wizard played liked a bot, the monsters saved more than normal and with being a melee character never being an issue. I also said that there was way better ways of playing for the Cleric Wizard (ironically, not really for the Barb though).

In return, you did for your build... Nothing. Showed nothing, crunched nothing. Substantiated no claim.

No bigger errors than you taking the most liberal interpretations of abilities - such as the Wizard's empowered evocation applying more than once to magic missile damage.

That can't be called an error when it's based on what used to be a source on par with She Advice (ie for that year that was still in effect).

I've never seen anyone do this. The most common inaccuracy I see in GWM damage comparisons is giving the GWM advantage but not the non-GWM alternative build.
Good for you. Hang out for a couple of weeks and you will :)

I'd say a far more common and more important error is direct comparisons of AOE damage to single target damage.

And here you also came up with a claim, where I can agree with the premise (there's a difference), but the weight of that difference (every target after the first only counts for half) is completely arbitrary.

Edit: just saw you added something in the other thread. I'll read it. Thanks

AC
HP
Temp Hp
Damage Resistances
Imposing Disadvantage on attacks against you
Dex and Con saves
Str saves if often in melee
Healing
Damage Reduction

So being completely taken out of the combat for failing a Will save is less important than taking damage from a goblin? I can't agree.

A cleric/wizard using most slots for survivability and having a handful left for offensive spells and using cantrips on 80% of their turns doesn't scream "battlefield presence" to me.
Literally no one arguing on behalf of the Forge Cleric Abjurer has suggested this. Actually, quite the opposite. I presume you are not arguing in bad faith, but this is a Strawman. The defenses are flexible. You can use them as necessary.

I personally don't play 6+ encounters per day. More like 1-3 on most days. That said we can theory craft around any number. It's just important to remember those encounters are rarely uniform in difficulty. If the Barbarian rages in the hardest but not the easiest that's significantly better than the proposals i've seen to handle that situation.
How so? Who has said the Barbarian should rage in the easiest encounters? 1-3 combats is also better for Cleric/Wizard. I used 6 combats to favour the Barbarian.

Maybe that's because Barbarian 7-19 tends to be fairly lackluster. Much more can be gained by multiclassing the Barbarian both in terms of offense and survivability.
Agreed. Also quite often by not playing Barbarian.

MaxWilson

2020-09-21, 12:49 AM

And here you also came up with a claim, where I can agree with the premise (there's a difference), but the weight of that difference (every target after the first only counts for half) is completely arbitrary.

Edit: just saw you added something in the other thread. I'll read it. Thanks

According to the other thread (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?619169-The-Impact-of-AOE-damage-vs-Single-Target-Damage&p=24719221#post24719221), it turns out Frogreaver's key assumption is that all of the AoE damage put together isn't enough to kill a single monster, i.e. it's a very weak AoE attack, basically cantrip-level. Emphasis mine:

Upon closer inspection - the first major thing I'm noticing is that you've broken one of the stated premises with your example. The single target damage needs to be applied to a single enemy that can take it. That is, your example isn't in the scope of scenarios that are covered by the stated formula.

If you can kill or at least seriously wound a large number of enemies with one or several AoEs, your efficiency approaches 100%, as measured by the reduction in the total number of attacks your enemy will get to make before they all die. E.g. if the party normally kills 2 Githyanki Warriors per round (~100 HP of damage vs. AC 17), then 12 Githyanki Warriors will get 12 + 10 + 8 + 6 + 4 + 2 attacks before they die (42 total). A hypothetical Fireball for 30 HP of damage to each Githyanki does 12 * 30 = 360 HP of damage, which means each Githyanki only has 19 HP left, and the PCs will kill about 5 Githyankis per round, so they'll get 12 + 7 + 2 = 21 attacks, so the Fireball reduced the Githyanki effectiveness by 21 attacks. But a perfectly-distributed 360 HP of damage would have killed 360/49 = 7.3 Githynaki outright, leaving the others at full health, so they'd get about 5 + 3 + 1 = 15 attacks, which means a 100% efficient damage distribution would remove 34 attacks. So, in this case the hypothetical Fireball removes 21/34 as many attacks as a 100% efficient damage distribution, meaning it's 62% effective by the metric Frogreaver is using, so in some ways it's similar to inflicting 0.62 * 360 = 222 HP in direct damage instead of 360 HP in AoE.

(Before anyone points it out--yes, 30 is an unusually high roll for a Fireball, and against DC 15ish, typically Githyanki will save on a 13 or better (40% of the time), so average damage for Fireball is 8d6 * 0.80 = 22.4, although it will be applied unevenly, so the party can gain back some of the advantages of direct damage by focusing attacks on the most-wounded Githyankis. For the sake of keeping the math simple in the example I just assumed all the Githyankis failed their saves. If you like you can pretend that it's some other effect instead of Fireball, like a Reverse Gravity spell with no save.)

There are other ways to measure effectiveness too, but reduction-in-attacks is apparently the one Frogreaver is using.

Frogreaver

2020-09-21, 01:00 AM

According to the other thread (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?619169-The-Impact-of-AOE-damage-vs-Single-Target-Damage&p=24719221#post24719221), it turns out Frogreaver's key assumption is that all of the AoE damage put together isn't enough to kill a single monster, i.e. it's a very weak AoE attack, basically cantrip-level. Emphasis mine:

If you can kill or at least seriously wound a large number of enemies with one or several AoEs, your efficiency approaches 100%, as measured by the reduction in the total number of attacks your enemy will get to make before they all die. E.g. if the party normally kills 2 Githyanki Warriors per round (~100 HP of damage vs. AC 17), then 12 Githyanki Warriors will get 12 + 10 + 8 + 6 + 4 + 2 attacks before they die (42 total). A hypothetical Fireball for 30 HP of damage to each Githyanki does 12 * 30 = 360 HP of damage, which means each Githyanki only has 19 HP left, and the PCs will kill about 5 Githyankis per round, so they'll get 12 + 7 + 2 = 21 attacks, so the Fireball reduced the Githyanki effectiveness by 21 attacks. But a perfectly-distributed 360 HP of damage would have killed 360/49 = 7.3 Githynaki outright, leaving the others at full health, so they'd get about 5 + 3 + 1 = 15 attacks, which means a 100% efficient damage distribution would remove 34 attacks. So, in this case the hypothetical Fireball removes 21/34 as many attacks as a 100% efficient damage distribution, meaning it's 62% effective by the metric Frogreaver is using, so in some ways it's similar to inflicting 0.62 * 360 = 222 HP in direct damage instead of 360 HP in AoE.

(Before anyone points it out--yes, 30 is an unusually high roll for a Fireball, and against DC 15ish, typically Githyanki will save on a 13 or better (40% of the time), so average damage for Fireball is 8d6 * 0.80 = 22.4, although it will be applied unevenly, so the party can gain back some of the advantages of direct damage by focusing attacks on the most-wounded Githyankis. For the sake of keeping the math simple in the example I just assumed all the Githyankis failed their saves. If you like you can pretend that it's some other effect instead of Fireball, like a Reverse Gravity spell with no save.)

There are other ways to measure effectiveness too, but reduction-in-attacks is apparently the one Frogreaver is using.

Yep. Good job pushing the formula with your examples so we could see where it broke more clearly.

Curious on the other effectiveness measures you have?

Without acknowledging that there's multiple ways of drawing aggro though. Being a continuous threat IS a way of drawing aggro and the most normal in games with no forced aggro mechanic

I think you have a much different definition of continuous threat than me.

Absolutely. I even showed how the Barbarian is behind in pure damage for most of five combats if the Cleric/Wizard played liked a bot, the monsters saved more than normal and with being a melee character never being an issue. I also said that there was way better ways of playing for the Cleric Wizard (ironically, not really for the Barb though).

...using a flawed methodology of counting up aoe damage and comparing it directly to single target damage.

In return, you did for your build... Nothing. Showed nothing, crunched nothing. Substantiated no claim.

I did respond. The focus of my response was and continues to be on your flawed damage comparison.

That can't be called an error when it's based on what used to be a source on par with She Advice (ie for that year that was still in effect).

A slightly different perspective: 5 years later and it's now clearly delineated as "not an official ruling". I'm not sure we should hold that tweet in the same esteem now that we did when it was made. The designer responsible for that tweet had the option to add it to the official rulings and chose not to. One would presume that means something?

That said your right, it's not exactly an error.

Good for you. Hang out for a couple of weeks and you will :)

Maybe. I have a feeling I'll be waiting on this one much longer than 2 weeks though lol.

And here you also came up with a claim, where I can agree with the premise (there's a difference), but the weight of that difference (every target after the first only counts for half) is completely arbitrary.

Edit: just saw you added something in the other thread. I'll read it. Thanks

Sounds good.

So being completely taken out of the combat for failing a Will save is less important than taking damage from a goblin? I can't agree.

For someone all about telling me I'm arbitrarily doing things, you just arbitrarily added a goblin here to make the comparison sound more in your favor. Oh the irony! (Please take this quip in the most light hearted way possible).

Literally no one arguing on behalf of the Forge Cleric Abjurer has suggested this. Actually, quite the opposite. I presume you are not arguing in bad faith, but this is a Strawman. The defenses are flexible. You can use them as necessary.

I call that the have my cake and eat it too defense. Or is it better labeled Schrodinger's PC. He's casting both web and Armor of Agothys out of the same level 2 slot. Kind of hard to do comparisons on what build is more defensive if you are not going to commit to actually being more defensive or at least just as defensive.

How so? Who has said the Barbarian should rage in the easiest encounters? 1-3 combats is also better for Cleric/Wizard. I used 6 combats to favour the Barbarian.

This was referring to treating each encounter as uniform when making the barbarians effective hp calc. Instead the rage encounters will be where most of the attacks/damage you take come from.

Agreed. Also quite often by not playing Barbarian.

Yea. I mean in terms of survivability and damage look what happens for the barbarian by adding 4 levels of fighter. He gets +1 AC, 3d10+12 hp from 2nd wind, Action surge, an additional damage reduction ability in parry and offensive ability in trip attack.

Skylivedk

2020-09-21, 01:27 AM

I think you have a much different definition of continuous threat than me.

So what is yours? I thought it was denying turns. At least it seemed an awful lot like it just a minute ago :smallbiggrin: IMX, having Grease, Web, Phantasmal Force, Fear, Hypnotic Pattern, etc. all do that job a lot better than the Barbarian.

...using a flawed methodology of counting up aoe damage and comparing it directly to single target damage.

But also with a bunch of concessions to make the AoE weaker: ie. buffing the enemies, only hitting 3 enemies with a Fireball (if they would be of the toughness you describe, I'd go for more or something else), etc. Again, 3 enemies with a Fireball is very very little. It's close to the bare minimum for using one IMX.

I did respond. The focus of my response was and continues to be on your flawed damage comparison.

So can you respond with how the Barbarian is a threat? That's what I didn't see. I did go with your presumptions and playing the caster almost as badly as I can imagine, and it still didn't look good for the Barbarian.

A slightly different perspective: 5 years later and it's now clearly delineated as "not an official ruling". I'm not sure we should hold that tweet in the same esteem now that we did when it was made. The designer responsible for that tweet had the option to add it to the official rulings and chose not to. One would presume that means something?

That said your right, it's not exactly an error.
Not really. A bunch of the interpretation rulings didn't make it to the compendium, nor have they been revoked. There's a weird kind of pride in WotC where they just won't admit when they screw up, so it's really hard to know if they feel a ruling was wrong when they don't handle it later.

Anyway, don't really care much for that ruling, one way or the other. As mentioned, I haven't played with an Evoker Wizard, so I haven't had to consider how I wanted to rule it.

For someone all about telling me I'm arbitrarily doing things, you just arbitrarily added a goblin here to make the comparison sound more in your favor. Oh the irony! (Please take this quip in the most light hearted way possible).
You can add other non-lethal damage dealers. There's tons. It's just that your hierarchy of defences seem to miss what I consider some of the most dangerous situations. My (near) TPK experiences have all been caused by failed mental saves and they are not even on the list. Damage mitigation is usually a lot easier.

I call that the have my cake and eat it too defense. Or is it better labeled Schrodinger's PC. He's casting both web and Armor of Agothys out of the same level 2 slot. Kind of hard to do comparisons on what build is more defensive if you are not going to commit to actually being more defensive or at least just as defensive.
and this is what I mean with you not substantiating your claim. You say that to be as defensive, all level 1 slots need to be burned. Why? Why not use AoA level 3 to get offense and defence (where each proc is worth a round of raging bobo)? Why not combine that with your area denial spells so you can hold chokepoints? Why not only use Shield against hits that you actually care about?

This was referring to treating each encounter as uniform when making the barbarians effective hp calc. Instead the rage encounters will be where most of the attacks/damage you take come from.

Exact same can be applied to the Forge Cleric Abjurer where you don't seem to find it important.

Yea. I mean in terms of survivability and damage look what happens for the barbarian by adding 4 levels of fighter. He gets +1 AC, 3d10+12 hp from 2nd wind, Action surge, an additional damage reduction ability in parry and offensive ability in trip attack.
Yeah, or Rogue, or Celestial Chain Warlock or... You'll hear no argument from me if you claim that most martials are meek in later levels.

Frogreaver

2020-09-21, 02:26 AM

So what is yours? I thought it was denying turns. At least it seemed an awful lot like it just a minute ago :smallbiggrin: IMX, having Grease, Web, Phantasmal Force, Fear, Hypnotic Pattern, etc. all do that job a lot better than the Barbarian.

Denying turns turns everything into a nice common currency that allows us to compare single target damage, aoe damage, and control effects. No doubt 3rd level spells are much better at accomplishing that.

But also with a bunch of concessions to make the AoE weaker: ie. buffing the enemies, only hitting 3 enemies with a Fireball (if they would be of the toughness you describe, I'd go for more or something else), etc. Again, 3 enemies with a Fireball is very very little. It's close to the bare minimum for using one IMX.

Sure.

So can you respond with how the Barbarian is a threat? That's what I didn't see. I did go with your presumptions and playing the caster almost as badly as I can imagine, and it still didn't look good for the Barbarian.

In terms of tanking Barbarian does about the same at will damage as most other martials (other than feat using ones). If he is being ignored he can make himself a much more acceptable target with reckless attack, both by increasing his damage dealt and simultaneously increasing his damage taken. It's not ideal from the survivability angle, but it's one of the best ways to increase aggro.

You can add other non-lethal damage dealers. There's tons. It's just that your hierarchy of defences seem to miss what I consider some of the most dangerous situations. My (near) TPK experiences have all been caused by failed mental saves and they are not even on the list. Damage mitigation is usually a lot easier.

For a tank? A tank is about getting enemies to focus on him and having enough survivability to take the hits. I'm not saying aren't important for him, but the tank is usually the one you are least worried about failing a mental save.

and this is what I mean with you not substantiating your claim. You say that to be as defensive, all level 1 slots need to be burned. Why? Why not use AoA level 3 to get offense and defence (where each proc is worth a round of raging bobo)? Why not combine that with your area denial spells so you can hold chokepoints? Why not only use Shield against hits that you actually care about?

So let's talk through this. I'm going to make 1 assumption. Adventure day is 2 encounters, short rest, 2 encounter, short rest, 2 encounter long rest. There's 1 harder encounter and 1 easier encounter distributed between each short rest.

So you have used 1 level 3 slot on armor of agathys. Granting you 61 "hp+ward" for the first series of encounters. Do you renew your expired armor of agathys for the next series of encounters. If so thats alot of your highest level slots taken for that spell and it's not even clear that this is enough to be more survivable than a barbarian.

The Barbarian in an adventure day would have 110.5 hit points including uses of hit dice. The Cleric/Wizard would have 127 (using 2 level 3 slots on armor of agathys and 1 level 2 slot on it (also including hit dice). The cleric has +2 ac over the barbarian. The barbarian has 3 rages he can use. I would argue that 110 hp with 3 rages is worth more than 127 hp with +2 Ac. That's why I don't suggest using armor of agathys early.

Also of note is that the cleric wizard may have a significant number of daily "hp" go to waste if they ever make it through a short rests worth of encounters without being hit. The barbarian doesn't have that concern.

Exact same can be applied to the Forge Cleric Abjurer where you don't seem to find it important.

Sure, but in those harder fights damage resistance with high hp is more important for survivability than 15 temp hp...

N7Paladin

2020-09-21, 03:41 AM

For the record, to anyone saying ludic is above repproach, that's reeeally sweet, but saying ANYONE is above reproach is very dangerous mentality. That includes friends and other users.

I tend to lurk most of the time, but I have NEVER seen ludic be welcoming of anyone who does not readily agree to his/her/their perspective. I have seen PLENTY of people prove ludic wrong, and yet those who dare challenge ludic very often get ganged up on, like they are doing to Frogreaver.

This thread actually reads far more like wizard bias. Most other wizard threads on this board tend to do so.

I've only seen maybe one other user who is actually willing to have his views challenged and possibly changed on wizards, and is open to an educated (not biased) dialog about it (MaxWilson I think his username is).

Now... In terms of the actual build, constantly being behind in spells and Intelligence whilst still just playing like a Wizard doesn't seem like a show stopper. I don't usually feel any build that dumps three stats is particularly tough when those things are challenged. Strength saves are very common on a lot of monsters and Dexterity saves are common period.

It also looks like its a whole lot of text about high levels and shows no regard for just how much gold the build will burn. That doesn't seem like a build intended for realistic play to me.

Okay...
I'm going to say this one more time because it's very important: no one should be above reproach, that is very dangerous thinking.

LudicSavant

2020-09-21, 04:18 AM

Skylivedk

2020-09-21, 04:38 AM

Denying turns turns everything into a nice common currency that allows us to compare single target damage, aoe damage, and control effects. No doubt 3rd level spells are much better at accomplishing that.

And yet seemingly you ignore that I listed 3 spells that aren't level 3.

In terms of tanking Barbarian does about the same at will damage as most other martials (other than feat using ones). If he is being ignored he can make himself a much more acceptable target with reckless attack, both by increasing his damage dealt and simultaneously increasing his damage taken. It's not ideal from the survivability angle, but it's one of the best ways to increase aggro.

And why would we exclude using feats when we're using feats? Also, it's just not true. The at-will damage is higher with dueling with close to 26,67% for strength more +3 and 23,52% for more +4. We're still conveniently ignoring that it's easy to deny the Barbarian doing much/any damage. Just move away.

For a tank? A tank is about getting enemies to focus on him and having enough survivability to take the hits. I'm not saying aren't important for him, but the tank is usually the one you are least worried about failing a mental save.
Eh, what?! Why? The tank does nothing in most cases when failing a Will save. Ie the most common is fear IIRC and that's a lot more detrimental to a melee/martial tank (Paladins excluded) than to a caster based tank. Caster tanks have ways of dealing with the condition and can deal with most conditions or function while suffering from them whereas a Barbarian tank can't.

So let's talk through this. I'm going to make 1 assumption. Adventure day is 2 encounters, short rest, 2 encounter, short rest, 2 encounter long rest. There's 1 harder encounter and 1 easier encounter distributed between each short rest.

So you have used 1 level 3 slot on armor of agathys. Granting you 61 "hp+ward" for the first series of encounters. Do you renew your expired armor of agathys for the next series of encounters. If so thats alot of your highest level slots taken for that spell and it's not even clear that this is enough to be more survivable than a barbarian. And I guess you conveniently picked level 5 again? And conveniently there's no mental saves in the so-called hard encounters? Also I guess the monsters don't melee hit the AoA?
A) seems obvious from your writing
B) would waste the rage and usefulness of the Barbarian completely in most cases
C) would have AoA give more damage per proc than the Barbarian does per round.
D) we have no assumptions about range either. In a fair amount of encounters IMX the Barbarian has a less than optimal first round because of distance.

The Barbarian in an adventure day would have 110.5 hit points including uses of hit dice. The Cleric/Wizard would have 127 (using 2 level 3 slots on armor of agathys and 1 level 2 slot on it (also including hit dice). The cleric has +2 ac over the barbarian. The barbarian has 3 rages he can use. I would argue that 110 hp with 3 rages is worth more than 127 hp with +2 Ac. That's why I don't suggest using armor of agathys early.
Again, it's a rubber band argument to extend the rage to all 110 hp. Barbarians are really, really easy to disable. Again, we seem to ignore that Shield and AoA (Shield more so than AoA, since AoA is probably pre-buff) are selective. Choice matters.

Also of note is that the cleric wizard may have a significant number of daily "hp" go to waste if they ever make it through a short rests worth of encounters without being hit. The barbarian doesn't have that concern.

No? They can just use it next rest. Also by my count, we're ignoring Arcane Recovery for some reason. That's one Web for each hard encounter and 1 bless for each easy one with some change left over. We also seemingly forget that the ward can be charged for free with Alarm.

Sure, but in those harder fights damage resistance with high hp is more important for survivability than 15 temp hp...
Definitely better for physical damage. Worse for all other kinds of damage where it's Absorb Elements that can do the Resistance. Unless we use a bear totem Barbarian who is then even less of a threat/aggro generator. Also, again: the rage is pretty easily cancelled with mental saving throws... Or just a Web.

For the record, to anyone saying ludic is above repproach, that's reeeally sweet, but saying ANYONE is above reproach is very dangerous mentality. That includes friends and other users.

Agreed.

I tend to lurk most of the time, but I have NEVER seen ludic be welcoming of anyone who does not readily agree to his/her/their perspective. I have seen PLENTY of people prove ludic wrong, and yet those who dare challenge ludic very often get ganged up on, like they are doing to Frogreaver.
I tend to disagree, but then again I tend to agree with LudicSavant so that makes sense ;-)

From my perspective, I more often see criticism of LudicSavant's builds that demand a higher burden of proof of LudicSavant than on the person criticizing. I've yet to see actually substantiated claims not be met with the same kind of counter points from LudicSavant's side. Again, I'm biased. I like LudicSavant's thoroughness in math and explanations, just like I appreciated seeing it from Frogreaver and MaxWilson in the other thread (on AoE vs. Single target damage), and just like I disliked the lack of substantiated arguments and math on the martial side in +1000 posts discussion about whether or not Martials are screeed (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?613670-Are-Martials-really-that-screwed and
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?615738-Are-Martials-really-that-screwed-V2).

This thread actually read far more like wizard bias. Most other wizard threads on this board tend to do so.
I have a super strong bias. I definitely find casters a lot better in most tiers. I've made no secret of that either (refer to the threat on are Martials Screwed - I'm in the clear: yes post a certain point, they do).

I've only seen maybe one other user who is actually willing to have his views challenged and possibly changed on wizards, and is open to an educated (not biased) dialog about it (MaxWilson I think his username is).

Then check that post. Without prior bias you can easily reach that conclusion. I personally asked for a refutation of a bunch of base points. The most basic just being choosing two levels of perceived balance and seeing who got more features and the more quantitatively improved features. It didn't turn out great for Martials. I'm still willing to be convinced otherwise, but it's another thread

Now... In terms of the actual build, constantly being behind in spells and Intelligence whilst still just playing like a Wizard doesn't seem like a show stopper. I don't usually feel any build that dumps three stats is particularly tough when those things are challenged. Strength saves are very common on a lot of monsters and Dexterity saves are common period.
So you're behind in spells known level for most of the game. Strength saves and Dec saves are usually damage/minor disables. For Dex a lot of that damage can be mitigated by Absorb Elements.

It's definitely different, and quite often IMO not necessarily in a preferable way, than a wizard. I do think it gets a lot for the price. I tried DMing one which was a pain to deal with. Wizards are great, so being less Wizard hurts. Being a tank Wizard is its own, different kind of, fun.

It also looks like its a whole lot of text about high levels and shows no regard for just how much gold the build will burn. That doesn't seem like a build intended for realistic play to me.
FWIW, I saw it played before Mark of Warding (and hence also before racial changes) in Storm King's Thunder and it did great.

Okay...
I'm going to say this one more time because it's very important: no one should be above reproach, that is very dangerous thinking.
Still agree

N7Paladin

2020-09-21, 06:19 AM

*refreshes thread*

*Checks analysis in other thread*
Thank you for investigating this so thoroughly! So it seems like the whole 'AoEs are worth 50% of single target damage' discussion frogreaver was having earlier in this thread was based on this model.

I think you've done a great job of outlining why it's not practical to make a general statement of "AoEs are worth 50% of single target damage."

Not only that, but I find the improved model you suggested intriguing and hope you'll keep me updated :smallsmile:

I saw this very post of yours right above mine, and underneath Frogreaver's. Is it common in this forum for people to delete then repost the same exact thing, just to get ahead of a single post than they were before?

I hope you acknowledge this bc I'm super curious why anyone would do this and it feels very unsportsmanlike. :smallconfused:

And I guess you conveniently picked level 5 again? And conveniently there's no mental saves in the so-called hard encounters? Also I guess the monsters don't melee hit the AoA?

Choosing level 5 covers more than half of the levels most people actually play and marks a change in tiers. There may be bias behind it, but then again so is choosing a level that favors the lagging behind Wizard.

Definitely better for physical damage. Worse for all other kinds of damage where it's Absorb Elements that can do the Resistance. Unless we use a bear totem Barbarian who is then even less of a threat/aggro generator. Also, again: the rage is pretty easily cancelled with mental saving throws... Or just a Web.

How common are mental saving throws for half the game or how common is Web (or similar) on NPCs.

From my perspective, I more often see criticism of LudicSavant's builds that demand a higher burden of proof of LudicSavant than on the person criticizing. I've yet to see actually substantiated claims not be met with the same kind of counter points from LudicSavant's side. Again, I'm biased. I like LudicSavant's thoroughness in math and explanations, just like I appreciated seeing it from Frogreaver and MaxWilson in the other thread (on AoE vs. Single target damage), and just like I disliked the lack of substantiated arguments and math on the martial side in +1000 posts discussion about whether or not Martials are screeed (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?613670-Are-Martials-really-that-screwed and
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?615738-Are-Martials-really-that-screwed-V2).

The burden of proof is on the person posting the build and making the claims.

So you're behind in spells known level for most of the game. Strength saves and Dec saves are usually damage/minor disables. For Dex a lot of that damage can be mitigated by Absorb Elements.

Knocking prone is a common example of a Strength based save and can very quickly result in the burning of spell slots on Shield and so on, unnecessarily. Absorb Elements doesn't help against a lot of traps, if it is an uncovered damage type or if you simply don't have your reaction available.

Thank you so much for admitting your multiple forms of significant bias in this matter.

Skylivedk

2020-09-21, 06:50 AM

*refreshes thread*

I saw this very post of yours right above mine, and underneath Frogreaver's. Is it common in this forum for people to delete then repost the same exact thing, just to get ahead of a single post than they were before?

I hope you acknowledge this bc I'm super curious why anyone would do this and it feels very unsportsmanlike. :smallconfused:

Choosing level 5 covers more than half of the levels most people actually play and marks a change in tiers. There may be bias behind it, but then again so is choosing a level that favors the lagging behind Wizard.

How common are mental saving throws for half the game or how common is Web (or similar) on NPCs.

The burden of proof is on the person posting the build and making the claims.

Knocking prone is a common example of a Strength based save and can very quickly result in the burning of spell slots on Shield and so on, unnecessarily. Absorb Elements doesn't help against a lot of traps, if it is an uncovered damage type or if you simply don't have your reaction available.

Thank you so much for admitting your multiple forms of significant bias in this matter.

A)
We all have biases. It's pretty much inevitable as humans since your experience inevitably colour your impressions, associations and by consequence your train of thought. Part of developing rationality of to figure out your biases and develop strategies for seeing beyond them. In my case, I've gone quite far to see the point in Martials at higher tiers. They haven't impressed.

B)
It's part of the reason why I keep insisting on seeing something that should make the Barbarian dangerous. He pretty much isn't as far as I can tell. Puny damage, almost no control and useless at range. At level 5, the difference in damage and survivability is circumstantial at best. From there on, each level will favour the caster.

C)
I find it weird that you presume something to be done for nefarious reasons rather than a series of other explanations (ie formatting, forum interface updating in a weird manner etc).

D)
If the burden of proof is on the one posting the build, why don't you hold the Barbarian build to the same standard?

E)
As far as I can tell, strength saves are more on easy to Fireball mobs and wisdom on tpk threats: https://www.enworld.org/threads/on-saving-throws-a-monster-manual-analysis.548068/

Again: where the FC Abjurer has flexibility in both offense and defense, the Barbarian does not. If it doesn't deal hp damage or is in range of pointy stick, you might resort to throwing a less efficient (but weirdly not less pointy) stick. The Barbarian isn't good against that trap either.. Matter of fact, might easily be worse since he will have no Misty Step/Levitate/Rope Trick to deal with it (later Fly, Dimension Door etc) and probably a lower perception than the owl with which to spot said trap.

Dork_Forge

2020-09-21, 07:25 AM

B)
It's part of the reason why I keep insisting on seeing something that should make the Barbarian dangerous. He pretty much isn't as far as I can tell. Puny damage, almost no control and useless at range. At level 5, the difference in damage and survivability is circumstantial at best. From there on, each level will favour the caster.

E)
As far as I can tell, strength saves are more on easy to Fireball mobs and wisdom on tpk threats: https://www.enworld.org/threads/on-saving-throws-a-monster-manual-analysis.548068/

Again: where the FC Abjurer has flexibility in both offense and defense, the Barbarian does not. If it doesn't deal hp damage or is in range of pointy stick, you might resort to throwing a less efficient (but weirdly not less pointy) stick. The Barbarian isn't good against that trap either.. Matter of fact, might easily be worse since he will have no Misty Step/Levitate/Rope Trick to deal with it (later Fly, Dimension Door etc) and probably a lower perception than the owl with which to spot said trap.

I like that you are labelling your points, but I think it may be more useful if you edit in the label to the quote, it would be more intuitive to follow.

B) The vastly depends on the Barbarian in question, some are damage focused, a couple have control based options and one can be focused on damage absorption. In terms of survivability I don't think circumstantial is fair, the Barbarian's hp lead will continue to expand and the number of rages will continue to increase, part of the proposed build's durability comes from a prebuff, combats without said prebuff are inevitable

E) Just because a type of save is more common on mobs doesn't mean Fireball, or any aoe, is an applicable answer. Slots may not be available, an adequate aoe may not yet be learned or you may choose to not blast your friends out of courtesy. The proposed build has a 0 initiative modifier and isn't an Evoker, there's no reason to assume reliable use of aoe in anything resembling optimum positioning. The moment you damage allies is the moment you've failed as a tank. Wisdom saves are a more common threat at higher levels, at which point an ASI can be thrown at Res:Wis if desired. Your own link shows Strength as being a save on par with Wisdom by the way.

I don't understand why you'd think a Barbarian wouldn't be good against a trap? They're commonly Dex based, not only is the Barbarian likely to have a +2 Dex, they'll also have Danger Sense, giving them a much better chance at saving against the trap and a large hp pool to absorb unexpected damage (worth noting here that allies can heal hp, an Abjurer's ward is their own responsibility).

As for the Owl thing, I'll admit this is a rather large pet peeve of mine. Familiars are credited with so much and it's hailed as a Wizard centric ability, since so many Wizard builds have dips and feats... why wouldn't it be assumed that any old character would just pick up a familiar? Magic Initiate would add utility cantrips for out of combat and a familiar for the apparent holy grail of Wizard utility.

Ranged is a fair disadvantage to level at a Barbarian, assuming that the enemy is flying or is greater than 40 ft away (5th onwards) or for some reason the Barbarian doens't want to use a javelin. That is a lot of ifs though.

A thought occurred to me and I'm genuinely curious as to the thoughts on the matter, how would this Wizard deal with a Beholder? Assuming say, level 10.

LudicSavant

2020-09-21, 08:55 AM

I saw this very post of yours right above mine, and underneath Frogreaver's. Is it common in this forum for people to delete then repost the same exact thing, just to get ahead of a single post than they were before?

I hope you acknowledge this

It's because I added an additional ~80 words and an extra quote to my original reply to MaxWilson, and at some point in that process hit the 'delete' button instead of the 'edit' button. I do this occasionally. Why wouldn't I acknowledge this?

Edit:

A thought occurred to me and I'm genuinely curious as to the thoughts on the matter, how would this Wizard deal with a Beholder? Assuming say, level 10.

Are we still talking about my Steel Wizard here? Hmm. Maybe Fog Cloud or a similar vision blocker. The Beholder can Antimagic Field it, but that only suppresses it, it pops back up when the AMF gets moved or turned off. And the Beholder can't use its eye rays on targets it can't see, nor on targets within its antimagic field. At which point the Beholder doesn't have a whole lot it can do all by its lonesome.

Things get more interesting when a beholder has friends.

Skylivedk

2020-09-21, 10:10 AM

I like that you are labelling your points, but I think it may be more useful if you edit in the label to the quote, it would be more intuitive to follow.
Agreed.
I usually answer when I take breaks from work so when I'm away from my computer... And quotes on the phone are a pain

B) The vastly depends on the Barbarian in question, some are damage focused, a couple have control based options and one can be focused on damage absorption. In terms of survivability I don't think circumstantial is fair, the Barbarian's hp lead will continue to expand and the number of rages will continue to increase, part of the proposed build's durability comes from a prebuff, combats without said prebuff are inevitable

The amount of rages very very slowly especially compared to spell slots. If the tank is good at soaking non physical, it's weak at control and vice versa. Even the control based options are not strong. Only one target AFAIK on AG. Combats without the pre-buffs are indeed inevitable. They're not frequent, but sure, granted. Luckily Shield and Absorb Elements are both there (and you'd probably have room for stuff like Invisibility and/or Misty Step).

E) Just because a type of save is more common on mobs doesn't mean Fireball, or any aoe, is an applicable answer. Slots may not be available, an adequate aoe may not yet be learned or you may choose to not blast your friends out of courtesy. The proposed build has a 0 initiative modifier and isn't an Evoker, there's no reason to assume reliable use of aoe in anything resembling optimum positioning. The moment you damage allies is the moment you've failed as a tank. Wisdom saves are a more common threat at higher levels, at which point an ASI can be thrown at Res:Wis if desired. Your own link shows Strength as being a save on par with Wisdom by the way.

Only in frequency. What I said about strength saves having minor annoyance effects holds true to a very large extent. It's also true a huge part of those saving throws are on mobs that just aren't that dangerous later in the game.

I don't understand why you'd think a Barbarian wouldn't be good against a trap? They're commonly Dex based, not only is the Barbarian likely to have a +2 Dex, they'll also have Danger Sense, giving them a much better chance at saving against the trap and a large hp pool to absorb unexpected damage (worth noting here that allies can heal hp, an Abjurer's ward is their own responsibility).
Compared to the tool box of spells? I took traps to also include falling down pits with monsters, ambushes etc. The Barbarian doesn't have many buttons. A Wizard does.

As for the Owl thing, I'll admit this is a rather large pet peeve of mine. Familiars are credited with so much and it's hailed as a Wizard centric ability, since so many Wizard builds have dips and feats... why wouldn't it be assumed that any old character would just pick up a familiar? Magic Initiate would add utility cantrips for out of combat and a familiar for the apparent holy grail of Wizard utility.
Yup, but by that time the Barbarian in question is at least level 8 and both the familiar and the cantrips might seem a bit expensive. It can work though. I haven't said all Barbarian builds are completely useless, just that the one with Toughness struck me as not doing enough to warrant being hit. The extra hp and survivability didn't matter from my P.O.V. In most of my games that Barbarian would simply be ignored.

Ranged is a fair disadvantage to level at a Barbarian, assuming that the enemy is flying or is greater than 40 ft away (5th onwards) or for some reason the Barbarian doens't want to use a javelin. That is a lot of ifs though.

A thought occurred to me and I'm genuinely curious as to the thoughts on the matter, how would this Wizard deal with a Beholder? Assuming say, level 10.
Not really, but YMMV. Being degraded to javelins is already a major nerf to Bobo and flying becomes a lot more common later on. So does higher movement speed, enemy casters as mental saving throws IMX. If you only/for the vast majority have physical damage AND the DM is kind enough to target the Barbarian because he is screaming very loudly, then yes, I can see the Barbarian work.

In my campaigns, he'd mostly be a big, hunk of physical damage resisting non-threat. Little damage, very little control, obvious and glaring weaknesses. He'd be easily circumvented and/or ignored. I don't get the point of the sword and board, no reckless attack, Toughness taking Barbarian. It's weak and I mean that with no offense intended. I'd actively warn players not to play that character at my table.

Christew

2020-09-21, 10:36 AM

For the record, to anyone saying ludic is above repproach, that's reeeally sweet, but saying ANYONE is above reproach is very dangerous mentality.
*Snip*
I'm going to say this one more time because it's very important: no one should be above reproach, that is very dangerous thinking.
Instead of making vague alarmist claims, you can just quote what I actually said. It tends to prevent the kind of out of context misinterpretation at play here.
Here is what I actually said (emphasis added):

LudicSavant's credentials are pretty much above reproach (I genuinely recommend you do the reading on her contributions here, it is worth the time and effort).
Credentials and a person are not the same thing. Using qualifiers changes the meaning of sentences. In context of the discussion, I was clearly referring to rules knowledge (I'm still pretty sure she knows how HBC works) and nothing more "dangerous." Thank you for attempting to warn the people about such mentalities, but please don't use oblique references as a way to sidestep outright misquoting me and then draw conclusions that the actual quote do not allow for ... That's reeeally not sweet.

MaxWilson

2020-09-21, 10:48 AM

How common are mental saving throws for half the game or how common is Web (or similar) on NPCs.

"It depends."

In some games, mental saves like Hold Person can be a Barbarian's biggest problem from Tier 1. (Instantly lose Rage AND become a sitting duck for auto-crits.) There's no shortage of CR 2+ monsters that can cast Hold Person or inflict fear/confusion/etc., if the DM elects to use them. (Inspireds, Hobgoblin Devastators, Gibbering Mouthers, Bone Nagas, Banshees, Mummies, Flameskulls, Kuo-toa priests, Neogi Masters, etc.) But, _does_ she? There are even more monsters that don't have these traits.

So many arguments and differences of opinion come down to DMing style, and the truth is we're not all fighting the same kinds of monsters. No wonder we don't have the same opinions about what's important!

Yep. Good job pushing the formula with your examples so we could see where it broke more clearly.

Curious on the other effectiveness measures you have?

One that I like a lot is loss ratios: how much damage are we taking relative to damage we inflict? It's pretty good at providing tactical guidance, at least against simple monsters (not spellcasters with concentration).

I am much less fond of DPR but it is also a measure of effectiveness, and it's important to people who value table time highly: killing the enemy faster in real time lets you get in adventuring in four hours, even if you take more HP damage. (Then again, a round of combat doesn't have to be slow either, especially in TotM. A strategy which takes ten minutes (100) to kill a tough enemy because you only get one attack every five rounds while kiting does not necessarily have to involve sitting there for hours moving miniatures around.) DPR is also better than loss ratios when you have squishies to protect, like NPC hostages.

I don't have any great metrics for measuring effectiveness against spellcasting monsters or highly-mobile monsters with hit-and-run tactics (like vampires). Loss ratios still work in those cases, but the analysis is complex. Maybe there's a better way.

E) Just because a type of save is more common on mobs doesn't mean Fireball, or any aoe, is an applicable answer. Slots may not be available, an adequate aoe may not yet be learned or you may choose to not blast your friends out of courtesy. The proposed build has a 0 initiative modifier and isn't an Evoker, there's no reason to assume reliable use of aoe in anything resembling optimum positioning. The moment you damage allies is the moment you've failed as a tank. Wisdom saves are a more common threat at higher levels, at which point an ASI can be thrown at Res:Wis if desired. Your own link shows Strength as being a save on par with Wisdom by the way.

See, here's a case where I think loss ratios matter. I would say "the moment you hurt your own side's loss ratio, you've failed as a tank," but that didn't necessarily mean you shouldn't damage your allies! If tossing a 28 HP Fireball on top of my paralyzed Barbarian friend prevents him from getting auto-critted by eight hobgoblins for 16d8+32d6+8 (192) damage, Fireball away!

Dork_Forge

2020-09-21, 03:19 PM

Agreed.
I usually answer when I take breaks from work so when I'm away from my computer... And quotes on the phone are a pain

Ahh I know that pain

The amount of rages very very slowly especially compared to spell slots. If the tank is good at soaking non physical, it's weak at control and vice versa. Even the control based options are not strong. Only one target AFAIK on AG. Combats without the pre-buffs are indeed inevitable. They're not frequent, but sure, granted. Luckily Shield and Absorb Elements are both there (and you'd probably have room for stuff like Invisibility and/or Misty Step).

Yes, but for the most part one rage will see you through one combat and spell slots are far from combat specific, so the scaling issue isn't a straightforward comparison. If this Wizard is actually playing like a Wizard then presumably slots are being spent out of combat and by the very nature of prebuffs, not running anywhere enar complete efficiency.

Only in frequency. What I said about strength saves having minor annoyance effects holds true to a very large extent. It's also true a huge part of those saving throws are on mobs that just aren't that dangerous later in the game.

Strength saves are more often not annoyances, they're setting you up for worse situations. Being knocked prone is an inconvenience if there's no follow up, if you're being hounded by a pack of Dire Wolves etc. with riders, then you're in for a world of hurt or slot burning.

As someone that regularly throws things like Dire Wolves at players, that's a DMing difference. If your DM isn't challenging you with certain saves then they won't matter, if they do then you'll regret that low score very quickly. There's a lot of text about higher level features and combos, but the character needs to actually get to that point.

Compared to the tool box of spells? I took traps to also include falling down pits with monsters, ambushes etc. The Barbarian doesn't have many buttons. A Wizard does.

The Barbarian doesn't have buttons for the most part, the have passive benefits, at 7th level they can negate surprise, at second level they can chuck advantage on top of their positive Dex modifier. As with all Wizard builds though this talk of spells solving everything just makes me want to see a spell list put together (especially when the Wizard is subpar in that regard).

As for pits... I don't think I'd ever make players just fall into a pit, and it'd certainly be a Dex save to avoid it. In that circumstance the Barbarian is least likely to fall in and better spontaneously prepared to take unexpected damage.

Yup, but by that time the Barbarian in question is at least level 8 and both the familiar and the cantrips might seem a bit expensive. It can work though. I haven't said all Barbarian builds are completely useless, just that the one with Toughness struck me as not doing enough to warrant being hit. The extra hp and survivability didn't matter from my P.O.V. In most of my games that Barbarian would simply be ignored.

Another table difference, I just don't think we'll agree on this, imo it takes a certain kind of enemy to persist in trying to take down the toughest target when softer targets abound (I also don't think a Barbarian just Extra Attacking is negligible damage, so that seems to be another point of difference).

Not really, but YMMV. Being degraded to javelins is already a major nerf to Bobo and flying becomes a lot more common later on. So does higher movement speed, enemy casters as mental saving throws IMX. If you only/for the vast majority have physical damage AND the DM is kind enough to target the Barbarian because he is screaming very loudly, then yes, I can see the Barbarian work.

So, flying enemies are becoming an issue and there's no one in the party to help the martials close the gap? No ranged Battle Masters with trip? The moment a combat shifts to ranged flying enemies most party members risk losing out heavily. I'm not sure why you mentioned higher movement? Was that meant to be a hit and run thing? Barbarians are far from slow...

In my campaigns, he'd mostly be a big, hunk of physical damage resisting non-threat. Little damage, very little control, obvious and glaring weaknesses. He'd be easily circumvented and/or ignored. I don't get the point of the sword and board, no reckless attack, Toughness taking Barbarian. It's weak and I mean that with no offense intended. I'd actively warn players not to play that character at my table.

Big difference in campaigns, if glaring weaknesses are a problem then why aren't three dump stats, heavy armor and heavy reliance on spells falling into that hole too? Sure you can name specific things that will mess a Barbarian up, it's not a stretch to get those same things against the Wizard. Enemy casters? Dispel Magic and Counter Spell are going to be major wrenches, and even if the Wizard counters, it's a very fast erosion of slots and a reaction that isn't there for Shield or Absorb elements.

A weakness on the Wizard's part is also the reliance on the Ward, when that gets low, then what? You have a d6 hit die and your allies can't heal your ward. Outside of cheese you can't meaningfully recharge your ward either. If you're actually taking damage then it's a downward slope throughout the day.

Credentials and a person are not the same thing. Using qualifiers changes the meaning of sentences. In context of the discussion, I was clearly referring to rules knowledge (I'm still pretty sure she knows how HBC works) and nothing more "dangerous." Thank you for attempting to warn the people about such mentalities, but please don't use oblique references as a way to sidestep outright misquoting me and then draw conclusions that the actual quote do not allow for ... That's reeeally not sweet.

I understand the distinctions you're making, but most people don't focus on technicalities (which I believe these fall into), pretty much may as well say beyond reproach, credentials a lot of the time may as well mean the person referred to in the context. Though to be honest unless credentials are actually questioned (which I don't believe they were) it just feels more like throwing the existing contributions of one member on the forum on the forum against a newer or less active member (which is of course a strict no no). On the other hand Frogreaver made a mistake regarding HBC, that has been brought up multiple times out of context for no real reason I can see. Even now you're bringing it up where it doesn't really serve a purpose to do so.

Online discussions go a lot better if people don't try to discredit or call into question others based on unrelated mistakes, you can certainly do so, but it usually leads to many, long, posts that are tangential to the actual discussion, much like the recent pages of this thread.

See, here's a case where I think loss ratios matter. I would say "the moment you hurt your own side's loss ratio, you've failed as a tank," but that didn't necessarily mean you shouldn't damage your allies! If tossing a 28 HP Fireball on top of my paralyzed Barbarian friend prevents him from getting auto-critted by eight hobgoblins for 16d8+32d6+8 (192) damage, Fireball away!

I can see your point and there's certainly cases for that (though I'm not sure the tank doing so best fits their role). It would depend on a few factors to me, is that Barbarian resitant to fire? Is there Rage still active? Will your Fireball kill the hobgoblins or will you mostly damage them, leaving a now significantly wounded Barbarian to face multiple attacks (I think Hobgoblins are relatively squishy foes against a Fireball, but some may be out of formation with bows drawn)?

Christew

2020-09-21, 04:55 PM

I understand the distinctions you're making, but most people don't focus on technicalities (which I believe these fall into), pretty much may as well say beyond reproach, credentials a lot of the time may as well mean the person referred to in the context. Though to be honest unless credentials are actually questioned (which I don't believe they were) it just feels more like throwing the existing contributions of one member on the forum on the forum against a newer or less active member (which is of course a strict no no). On the other hand Frogreaver made a mistake regarding HBC, that has been brought up multiple times out of context for no real reason I can see. Even now you're bringing it up where it doesn't really serve a purpose to do so.

Online discussions go a lot better if people don't try to discredit or call into question others based on unrelated mistakes, you can certainly do so, but it usually leads to many, long, posts that are tangential to the actual discussion, much like the recent pages of this thread.
We can agree to disagree as to whether different words and sentence meanings amount to technicalities or not.

We can outright agree that the majority of this thread has been largely off topic. Perhaps we peel off Wizard v Barbarian into its own thread, return AoE v Single Target to the thread created for it, and allow this space for discussion of the Mini-Guide.

Dork_Forge

2020-09-21, 05:56 PM

Rage is definitely not still active because the Barbarian is paralyzed.

Hobgoblins have 11 HP so it's a good bet that the Fireball will kill them. There may be other hobgoblins in the scenario with bows drawn, but if Fireball kills the ones next to the Barbarian at least they won't get +2d6 Martial Advantage unless one of them wastes a turn Dashing over next to the Barbarian.

Personally if I were the Barbarian I wouldn't even care if I have fire resistance or not. Even if I've got AC 19 somehow, 8 hobgoblins attacking at +3 with advantage (for paralysis) means 3.5 hits on average, which is 84 HP (per round!) because I don't have Rage. 28 damage is better than 84 damage, per round. Please Fireball my position immediately!

My PHB might be old, but conidtion wise it only calls out unconscious for ending rage, so as long as the paralysis and attacks happen after the Barbarian's last attack turn and before a paralysed turn takes place, Rage (and the associated resistances) should still be in play. Of course later game Barbarians will be unaffected Ragewise, but at that point they probably aren't worried about some Hobgolins and a little Fireball every now and then.

So seeing as this is Hobgoblins and Fireball, I think it's reasonable to assume level 5? Assuming a +3 Con race the Barbarian would have a max hp of 55, eating 28 points of unresisted Fireball damage is over half of their health assuming they weren't damage at all up until this point. If the encounter isn't over by this point then the Barbarian is in a very precarious position (even more so if there's another encounter or traps up ahead before a safe rest).

We can agree to disagree as to whether different words and sentence meanings amount to technicalities or not.

We can outright agree that the majority of this thread has been largely off topic. Perhaps we peel off Wizard v Barbarian into its own thread, return AoE v Single Target to the thread created for it, and allow this space for discussion of the Mini-Guide.

I at no point stated that the majority of the thread was off topic, nor do my words imply it. Personally the Barbarian comparison and commentary on damage seem entirely relevant to a guide where the OP posted a build making claims and direct comparisons to said Barbarian. If those things are off topic, then they shouldn't have been brought up to begin with.

LudicSavant

2020-09-21, 06:05 PM

On the other hand Frogreaver made a mistake regarding HBC, that has been brought up multiple times out of context for no real reason I can see.

Thank you for saying 'that I can see' rather than assuming that there simply was none. Here is the context, and my reason, after which I sincerely hope we can move on to another, more interesting topic.

I believe my own comment has been referred to out of context a couple times in the last page. Perhaps the most important bit of missing context being the false suggestion that I was just referring to '1 misremembered rule'...

1 misremembered rule

be wrong once

Misremembering 1 thing

that view about misremembering 1 rule.

Repeating something over and over doesn't make it true.

... when this was not the issue. I had in fact been referring to a list of numerous things, some of which I felt were ongoing to the current page.

I suggested to frogreaver that it would be helpful to him to show his work so that it could be checked, since IIRC not once but every time I have seen him do so in this thread over the last 5 pages, it has constructively revealed an error -- whether that was pointing him to an errata he didn't know about, a rule he says he misremembered, a mathematical oversight, or the like.

I feel that this list of instances of an error being helpfully revealed each time Frogreaver chooses to show his work has continued to this very page, with the latest example I'm aware of being MaxWilson checking Frogreaver's assumptions on his AoE formula and producing a more accurate and practical formula in place of the quite erroneous one. If neither that nor the HBC nor EE nor spell prep case are a clear example of the reason I think it would be helpful to show one's work, I don't know what is.

Revealing such mistakes and improving one's understanding is, to me, pretty much the point of a guide thread.

I even tried to give frogreaver pointers for how, when he shows his work, he could make his case more difficult to refute by myself or others, and thus make for a stronger case for his side (and therefore, in my view, a more interesting and productive conversation).

Here's where I said that:

I think it'd be helpful for you to show your work so that it can be checked. Especially since each time I've seen you do so in this thread so far there has been some major error -- missing erratas, leaving out proficiency, saying things scale with a stat they don't scale with, etc. You might be overlooking something.

Now naturally, most comparisons require some degree of abstraction and inexactitude in order to be done at all. But Barbarians are often particularly prone to being blown out of proportion by orders of magnitude in oversimplified white room analysis, via the following methods:
1) Ignoring accuracy when calculating damage, especially for GWM builds.
2) Only measuring one kind of defense, while dumping your ability to deal with any other kind of situation (which I call 'building Achilles'). If you're in a game where the enemy isn't just pulling their punches, a defense tends to only be as strong as its weakest link.
3) Leaving out the need to have a presence on the battlefield and defend allies (which I call 'making a turtle rather than a tank')
4) Assuming 100% rage uptime even at low levels. Remember, if you're doing 6+ encounters, you rage for half or less of them. And even in those encounters, Rage isn't up until your turn (this doesn't get solved until level 7 with Feral Instinct, and is subject to interruption (doubly so if one is 'building Achilles').

So if/when you show your work, I would recommend avoiding doing any of the above.

Anyways, all of that said, my expectation would be that Barbarian makes its best showing in Tier 1 and early Tier 2.

Heck, the first thing on that list was 'missing erratas,' which clearly has nothing whatsoever to do with HBC. So I think it should be pretty clear that I wasn't just talking about HBC here.

On a vaguely related note:

I understand the distinctions you're making, but most people don't focus on technicalities (which I believe these fall into), pretty much may as well say

The nuance and technicalities of what people say are important to their meaning. If those nuances and technicalities are disregarded, then it's a good way to end up with people talking past each other.

Now then, it would be really great if we could

allow this space for discussion of the Mini-Guide.

because I've got an awful lot more I could talk about.

MaxWilson

2020-09-21, 07:54 PM

My PHB might be old, but conidtion wise it only calls out unconscious for ending rage*snip*

You're totally right. I had misremembered the rule. I briefly edited in a correction with a strikeout, then afterwards I considered what Christew had said and decided that after correcting my error, my post said nothing of value that you hadn't already said and deleted it, since it was off-topic and apparently no one had seen it yet. Apparently that was after you already started writing this post--apologies for that.

Frogreaver

2020-09-21, 08:38 PM

I even tried to give frogreaver pointers for how, when he shows his work, he could make his case more difficult to refute by myself or others, and thus make for a stronger case for his side (and therefore, in my view, a more interesting and productive conversation).

I'm sure you didn't mean for it, but giving trivial mathematical advice out to someone that hasn't demonstrated any such lack of understanding regarding any such mathematical concepts is very condescending.

I tend to lurk most of the time, but I have NEVER seen ludic be welcoming of anyone who does not readily agree to his/her/their perspective. I have seen PLENTY of people prove ludic wrong, and yet those who dare challenge ludic very often get ganged up on, like they are doing to Frogreaver.

Thank you!

it just feels more like throwing the existing contributions of one member on the forum on the forum against a newer or less active member (which is of course a strict no no). On the other hand Frogreaver made a mistake regarding HBC, that has been brought up multiple times out of context for no real reason I can see. Even now you're bringing it up where it doesn't really serve a purpose to do so.

Thank you! IMO Your other points were spot on as well. I feel like you say them a bit cleaner and less confrontational than they tend to be coming from me (something I will have to work on).

N7Paladin

2020-09-22, 03:41 AM

"It depends."

In some games, mental saves like Hold Person can be a Barbarian's biggest problem from Tier 1. (Instantly lose Rage AND become a sitting duck for auto-crits.) There's no shortage of CR 2+ monsters that can cast Hold Person or inflict fear/confusion/etc., if the DM elects to use them. (Inspireds, Hobgoblin Devastators, Gibbering Mouthers, Bone Nagas, Banshees, Mummies, Flameskulls, Kuo-toa priests, Neogi Masters, etc.) But, _does_ she? There are even more monsters that don't have these traits.

So many arguments and differences of opinion come down to DMing style, and the truth is we're not all fighting the same kinds of monsters. No wonder we don't have the same opinions about what's important!

That's a very good point, our DMs and playstyles greatly influence what we value in the game, thank you for adding that. I always enjoy reading your well thought out contributions to debates, even when I may not necessarily agree with what you're saying. 😊🤩

A)
We all have biases. It's pretty much inevitable as humans since your experience inevitably colour your impressions, associations and by consequence your train of thought. Part of developing rationality of to figure out your biases and develop strategies for seeing beyond them. In my case, I've gone quite far to see the point in Martials at higher tiers. They haven't impressed.

Everyone has biases, sure, but there is a difference between supporting something because you agree and supporting a person/stance just because of said bias. If you find yourself saying so clearly 'yes I'm biased' so often, then it is quite likely that you're debating subjectively even if your posts appear objective at first read.

As for the link, thank you very much... Though, I guess I don't need to show you what's up, DorkForge did that just fine.

It's because I added an additional ~80 words and an extra quote to my original reply to MaxWilson, and at some point in that process hit the 'delete' button instead of the 'edit' button. I do this occasionally. Why wouldn't I acknowledge this?

1. You have to check the delete box, and then click the delete button in order to delete a post.

2. The delete option/button is at the very top of the page. The edit option/button is at the bottom, well-after the big box of text.

Funny little accidents.

It is very fortunate you had your exact original reply copied, ready to be pasted should such an accident side arise.

I stand corrected. 😉

Instead of making vague alarmist claims, you can just quote what I actually said. It tends to prevent the kind of out of context misinterpretation at play here.
Here is what I actually said (emphasis added):

Credentials and a person are not the same thing. Using qualifiers changes the meaning of sentences. In context of the discussion, I was clearly referring to rules knowledge (I'm still pretty sure she knows how HBC works) and nothing more "dangerous." Thank you for attempting to warn the people about such mentalities, but please don't use oblique references as a way to sidestep outright misquoting me and then draw conclusions that the actual quote do not allow for ... That's reeeally not sweet.

If people's posts represented 'pretty much' then maybe I'd take that technicality more seriously. As it stands, I'd like to point out that technically you aren't just defending rules knowledge that was never really in question, you're also defending subjective contributions such as this very colour coded guide. That is far from just being about rules knowledge, I can see that a Sorcerer dip is one of the hotly contested things earlier in this thread. The fact that "I want to be socially adequate and keep my slot progression" didn't come up at any point seems like more of a subjective bias than rules knowledge. Relying on outdated tweets that were written off as unofficial doesn't smack of exclusive rules master either, unless I missed a disclaimer in the guide somewhere that they aren't official and your DM need not pay any heed to a ridiculous ruling?

To say someone is above reproach is just as dangerous as saying their credentials are. You could be a well known surgeon, and still make mistakes, but if your credentials are "pretty much above reproach," you'll never get called out or learn from said mistakes. And that *is* alarming.

It's a "reeeally" good thing I wasn't intending to be sweet then, eh?

With the exception of maxwilson bc his only position isn't to unfalteringly support ludic, you are all proving exactly what I said. Anyone who dares challenge ludic at all gets ganged up on. For you all to sanctify a user in all but name is so odd to me and unwelcoming to anyone who again speaks up against them.

I am done with this thread. You have all proven in several threads at several times unable to have a discussion in which a specific user is challenged and I refuse to dignify this any longer.

Good luck to you all.

MaxWilson

2020-09-22, 10:16 AM

That's a very good point, our DMs and playstyles greatly influence what we value in the game, thank you for adding that. I always enjoy reading your well thought out contributions to debates, even when I may not necessarily agree with what you're saying. 😊🤩

Thanks!

Do note that I was misremembering the Rage rule--you do not instantly lose Rage when paralyzed, only when Unconscious. My bad. (You only lose Rage after your turn next, because you didn't attack, and even then only if no one damaged you since your previous turn.)

Satori01

2020-09-22, 10:23 AM

diplomancer

2020-09-22, 10:32 AM

MaxWilson

2020-09-22, 11:49 AM

Gambeson is very warm, which will cause you to sweat, that sweat is not evaporating due to the Plate and cloth you are wearing, which means your sweat freezes, and you are now on the train to Hypothermia.

At least, that's what happens in the real world. Maybe not so much in a world where you can chill your Gambeson for an hour with a quick Prestidigitation.

Maybe those realism effects are described in the new Rime adventure, and one could make an argument that even if they aren't, a DM is free to houserule to add them (assuming non AL play). But until there are actual game Rules about it, I don't think build guides are the places to discuss such sort of houserules and the effects they have on build decisions.

Wow. I remember the days when suggesting that people shouldn't worry or talk about the pros and cons of wearing armor in winter, until TSR publishes an "official" rulebook about it, would have been seen as a highly unusual way of playing D&D. How greatly things have changed under WotC!

Dork_Forge

2020-09-22, 12:07 PM

Well that escalated quickly.

In terms of the Dwarf build...it is not very much different then a Mountain Dwarf Abjurer from the PHB.
This pizza with Eberron toppings just has extra cheese, albeit tasty cheese.

The build is good at self protection, but not really great at force protection.
This Wizard is not halving damage to the party like an AG Barb, nor passing out Temp HP to everyone like a Celestial Lock, or an upcast Heroism spell.
As Ludic knows, HP like features such as Temp HP and Arcane Ward are not HPs....Sleep, Color Spray, Divine Word, and the Power Word spells ignore these HP Like effects.

In Tier 3 and 4, 15 STR and proficiency in Athletics, still means the character is subject to being shoved prone and grappled....the same old, same old tactics.

Armor of Agathys is a fine spell...but the most recent D&D release is Icewind Dale....cold damage will be resisted or ignored when playing something like this.

Extreme weather also, from a realism perspective, invalidates the use of heavy metal armor. There is a good reason why "Fighting Season" in Earth history is not in winter.

Gambeson is very warm, which will cause you to sweat, that sweat is not evaporating due to the Plate and cloth you are wearing, which means your sweat freezes, and you are now on the train to Hypothermia.

Practically speaking, in a dessert or the arctic, one is not going to be walking around in plate mail. The DMG is not a survival manual, it is a book of abstractions that bear little resemblance to reality.

Any Abjuration Wizard with access to all CharOP options is going to be doing just fine with access to the Alarm spell and time to kill.

Maybe those realism effects are described in the new Rime adventure, and one could make an argument that even if they aren't, a DM is free to houserule to add them (assuming non AL play). But until there are actual game Rules about it, I don't think build guides are the places to discuss such sort of houserules and the effects they have on build decisions.

In terms of rules the new adventure just parrots DMG rules (which it has no mention of armor types for cold) but in terms of disadvantages of heavy armour within the rules:

-It's expensive, on probably the most gold hungry class in the game

-In extreme heat characters in medium and heavy armour have disadvantage on their Con saves

-Xanathar's covers sleeping in medium and heavy armour, you don't lose any levels of exhaustion and only recover a quarter of spent hit die

-Whether or not your DM uses the above rule, sleeping in heavy armor is immersion breaking and silly, the long don and doff time guarantees that if you're attacked during a long rest, you'll be fighting with an AC of 10 in this case unless the Dwarf can grab their shield in time to get a towering 12.

-Stealth is a lost cause unless generous help is provided with Pass Without Trace, Guidance, Bardic Inspiration etc. proficiency is going to do little to help a 0 Dex and disadvantage

MaxWilson

2020-09-22, 12:45 PM

In terms of rules the new adventure just parrots DMG rules (which it has no mention of armor types for cold) but in terms of disadvantages of heavy armour within the rules:

-It's expensive, on probably the most gold hungry class in the game

-In extreme heat characters in medium and heavy armour have disadvantage on their Con saves

-Xanathar's covers sleeping in medium and heavy armour, you don't lose any levels of exhaustion and only recover a quarter of spent hit die

-(A) Whether or not your DM uses the above rule, sleeping in heavy armor is immersion breaking and silly, the long don and doff time guarantees that if you're attacked during a long rest, you'll be fighting with an AC of 10 in this case unless the Dwarf can grab their shield in time to get a towering 12.

-Stealth is a lost cause unless generous help is provided with Pass Without Trace, Guidance, Bardic Inspiration etc. proficiency is going to do little to help a 0 Dex and disadvantage

(A) I don't find sleeping in heavy armor immersion breaking at all. (Going to the bathroom on the other hand...)

diplomancer

2020-09-22, 12:46 PM

At least, that's what happens in the real world. Maybe not so much in a world where you can chill your Gambeson for an hour with a quick Prestidigitation.

Wow. I remember the days when suggesting that people shouldn't worry or talk about the pros and cons of wearing armor in winter, until TSR publishes an "official" rulebook about it, would have been seen as a highly unusual way of playing D&D. How greatly things have changed under WotC!

I think it's more to do with the internet, and its VERY wide audience, than with WotC. But really, what's a guide writer to do? Try to come up with every single possible houserule that DMs might create for realism sake? It would quickly become not a guide for the internet to peruse, but a guide for those who happen to play with him.

In terms of rules the new adventure just parrots DMG rules (which it has no mention of armor types for cold) but in terms of disadvantages of heavy armour within the rules:

-It's expensive, on probably the most gold hungry class in the game

-In extreme heat characters in medium and heavy armour have disadvantage on their Con saves

-Xanathar's covers sleeping in medium and heavy armour, you don't lose any levels of exhaustion and only recover a quarter of spent hit die

-Whether or not your DM uses the above rule, sleeping in heavy armor is immersion breaking and silly, the long don and doff time guarantees that if you're attacked during a long rest, you'll be fighting with an AC of 10 in this case unless the Dwarf can grab their shield in time to get a towering 12.

-Stealth is a lost cause unless generous help is provided with Pass Without Trace, Guidance, Bardic Inspiration etc. proficiency is going to do little to help a 0 Dex and disadvantage

That particular dwarf has a free casting of Mage Armor. So, AC 15 (20 with Shield spell). Not great, but not horrible either for being caught sleeping without armor at night (incidentally, I prefer the Artificer 1/Wizard X Mark of Warding dwarf, switch dex and wis in the proposed build. Start as Wiz to have decent Wis saves. Slightly worse AC, but more prepared spells, and it alleviates most of the problems you've mentioned)

MaxWilson

2020-09-22, 01:00 PM

I think it's more to do with the internet, and its VERY wide audience, than with WotC. But really, what's a guide writer to do? Try to come up with every single possible houserule that DMs might create for realism sake? It would quickly become not a guide for the internet to peruse, but a guide for those who happen to play with him.

I dunno, maybe you're describing why I don't pay much attention to "guides" in the first place. But if I wanted to write a guide, I'd consider it a poor guide if it assumed that everything would be run exactly under one uniform set of rules or one playstyle. If I don't cover contingencies such as "here is how this analysis changes if your DM won't allow you to do things like Dodge before you kick down the door and see if any monsters are in the room," I'm not doing a good job of educating people on how to play D&D in a broad sense. I'm only educating them in how to play a version of D&D which exactly matches my particular assumptions about how they play.

diplomancer

2020-09-22, 01:03 PM

I dunno, maybe you're describing why I don't pay much attention to "guides" in the first place. But if I wanted to write a guide, I'd consider it a poor guide if it assumed that everything would be run exactly under one uniform set of rules or one playstyle. If I don't cover contingencies such as "here is how this analysis changes if your DM won't allow you to do things like Dodge before you kick down the door and see if any monsters are in the room," I'm not doing a good job of educating people on how to play D&D in a broad sense. I'm only educating them in how to play a version of D&D which exactly matches my particular assumptions about how they play.

I believe this goes more in the direction of another thread on the difference between "build guides" and "play guides". They both have their place, but "build guides" can only really look at the rules that exist officially, not the rules that DMs might create.

Build guides won't teach you how to play (and if you know how to play and build, they are not THAT useful, at least not in relatively simple 5e). But if you are a newbie who wants to learn how to build an effective character, they are helpful.

Dork_Forge

2020-09-22, 01:03 PM

(A) I don't find sleeping in heavy armor immersion breaking at all. (Going to the bathroom on the other hand...)

All the power to you, but I don't envy your retired adventurers, their poor backs...

That particular dwarf has a free casting of Mage Armor. So, AC 15 (20 with Shield spell). Not great, but not horrible either for being caught sleeping without armor at night (incidentally, I prefer the Artificer 1/Wizard X Mark of Warding dwarf, switch dex and wis in the proposed build. Start as Wiz to have decent Wis saves. Slightly worse AC, but more prepared spells, and it alleviates most of the problems you've mentioned)

The Dwarf has a Dex of 10, so a 13AC, unless during this ambush you have the opprtunity to spend two actions? I suppose you could cast it when you take your armor off, and hope you only need to burn one action. I prefer the Artificer dip as well, though I think I'd rather dip Wizard on an Artificer than vice versa.

diplomancer

2020-09-22, 01:06 PM

All the power to you, but I don't envy your retired adventurers, their poor backs...

The Dwarf has a Dex of 10, so a 13AC, unless during this ambush you have the opprtunity to spend two actions? I suppose you could cast it when you take your armor off, and hope you only need to burn one action. I prefer the Artificer dip as well, though I think I'd rather dip Wizard on an Artificer than vice versa.

Can't you sleep with your shield strapped to your arm? ;)

And yes, IF you are going to use Heavy Armor, AND your DM doesn't let you sleep in Heavy Armor, AND you've got a free casting of Mage Armor, obviously you are going to cast it right before you sleep.

As to dipping wizard on an artificer, no good for an Abjurer, because of the way Arcane Ward scales. It's a good dip, but would be an entirely different character, with entirely different effects.

MaxWilson

2020-09-22, 01:08 PM

diplomancer

2020-09-22, 01:11 PM

Eh. I'd cast it right before I bathe instead. :-)
Dwarves don't bathe. That's why their Constitution is so high (and why they had a Cha penalty in past editions) :p

Dork_Forge

2020-09-22, 01:16 PM

Can't you sleep with your shield strapped to your arm? ;)

And yes, IF you are going to use Heavy Armor, AND your DM doesn't let you sleep in Heavy Armor, AND you've got a free casting of Mage Armor, obviously you are going to cast it right before you sleep.

As to dipping wizard on an artificer, no good for an Abjurer, because of the way Arcane Ward scales. It's a good dip, but would be an entirely different character, with entirely different effects.

If you're so inclined for a bit of brie before bed then why not ;)

I didn't mean to retain the build posted earlier, I was just saying I would probably dip Wiz on Artificer in general rather than the opposite. In that case I'd probably go War for Arcane Deflection and the initiative bump.

Satori01

2020-09-22, 01:55 PM

At least, that's what happens in the real world. Maybe not so much in a world where you can chill your Gambeson for an hour with a quick Prestidigitation.

That is precisely the point! Surviving life or death Survival scenarios is all about choices. The character that chose Prestidigitation, through clever play..thrives.
The person that chose Mending, now needs to look at their arsenal, and think up a solution.

The ritual magic available to 1st level Wizard characters would substantially increase the odds of surviving in the outdoors, in the hands of a skilled, and trained person.

DM is free to houserule to add them (assuming non AL play). But until there are actual game Rules about it, I don't think build guides are the places to discuss such sort of houserules and the effects they have on build decisions.
I'm curious as to what you mean by the above?

So if WOTC publishes an adventure with a site specific feature....say a Temple to Sea God...like Umberele, that contains a sacrificial drowning pool that has Specific Drowning rules that only apply to that spot...then that is ok, and official, and we on this board can talk about it.....all other scenarios are "house rules", and, henceforth, never to be referred to?

Is your position that we can only consider scenarios that have been published?

The game has millions of players, around the world. I don't think that all D&D Gaming 'tables' in all the world, are just playing with official products.

Imagining ways to represent special places, is the game, no matter the edition.

LudicSavant

2020-09-22, 02:07 PM

No build is supposed to be 'the perfect build for all possible parties and campaigns and rulings.' That would be quite literally impossible. One has to use their own judgment to at least some degree when considering whether a build is right for their party composition or campaign style. And if it's not, they should use another build.

For example, obviously a fire mage would be less effective if you were in a game where most of the enemies are Devils. Obviously wearing heavy armor is less effective if your DM says they're gonna give you hypothermia for wearing it.

I always include a variants/notes section in my builds to adapt to a variety of circumstances, but nothing's gonna cover everything.

The way I think about it can be summed up roughly in the words of Howard Moskowitz: 'There is no perfect pasta sauce. There are perfect pasta sauces.'

On an entirely separate note:

force protection.

I kinda regret not talking more (or almost at all) about how it goes about force protection (by which I assume you mean protecting teammates) in the original build post -- I basically just said 'you do so-called 'god wizard' things' and left it that, without saying a great deal about what I meant by that.

I see explaining how to play control/support Wizards as a whole as beyond the scope of what I was looking to accomplish in this thread (that would be a very much NOT miniature guide), but I still could have given at least a few examples.

I'll see if I can find time to write some up if anyone wants 'em.

Satori01

2020-09-22, 02:29 PM

MaxWilson

2020-09-22, 03:03 PM

Actually Ludic, in terms of Force Protection...Project Ward makes the build strong.
I was overly rash, in declaring it having limited Force Protection application.

Project Ward is feature-wise better then an AG's Spirit Shield.
The combination of Ancestral Protectors and Spirit Shield, is just more noticeable, in terms of gameplay feel.

Spirit Shield is pretty terrible, but at least it's free, and eventually comes with some damage. Ancestral Protectors (when it applies) is far, far better at ally-protection than Project Ward, and once you stack Spirit Shield on top it isn't remotely close.

At mid-levels, we're talking about the difference between preventing ~25 HP of damage per long rest, vs. preventing ~30 HP of damage per round.

P.S. It goes without saying of course that the wizard isn't going to rely purely on Project Ward to protect the party. Spells like Wall of Force, Web, Slow, etc. are also excellent. I'm speaking here strictly about the comparison between Project Ward and AG features, not about the stuff any wizard subclass can potentially do.

Dork_Forge

2020-09-22, 03:27 PM

Actually Ludic, in terms of Force Protection...Project Ward makes the build strong.
I was overly rash, in declaring it having limited Force Protection application.

Project Ward is feature-wise better then an AG's Spirit Shield.
The combination of Ancestral Protectors and Spirit Shield, is just more noticeable, in terms of gameplay feel.

The same I think is also true for builds that constantly grant Temp HP.

Now put this Wizard build in any party with an AG Barb and an Artillerist Artificer, and you really can handle a lot as a group.

The Ward is the only real thing keeping the durability of the character up, using project ward would certainly make the build better at protecting others, but it's handing away what protection it does have in spades (decreasing their Ward and leaving them without a reaction for Shield, Absorb Elemetns etc.). The minute this build starts projecting ward it needs to gtfo of melee imo.

LudicSavant

2020-09-22, 03:42 PM

Spirit Shield is pretty terrible, but at least it's free, and eventually comes with some damage. Ancestral Protectors (when it applies) is far, far better at ally-protection than Project Ward, and once you stack Spirit Shield on top it isn't remotely close.

At mid-levels, we're talking about the difference between preventing ~25 HP of damage per long rest, vs. preventing ~30 HP of damage per round.

P.S. It goes without saying of course that the wizard isn't going to rely purely on Project Ward to protect the party. Spells like Wall of Force, Web, Slow, etc. are also excellent. I'm speaking here strictly about the comparison between Project Ward and AG features, not about the stuff any wizard subclass can potentially do.

Nitpick:

Your ~25 HP per long rest figure assumes that there's no regeneration of the ward at all -- not even the Warding Dwarf's free racial spells. A level 11 Warding Dwarf Abjurer, for instance, generates anywhere from 35-129 hit points (depending on how many of their slots are Abjurations), +2 per ritual.

MaxWilson

2020-09-22, 03:45 PM

Nitpick:

Your ~25 HP per long rest figure assumes that there's no regeneration of the ward at all -- not even the Warding Dwarf's free racial spells. A level 11 Warding Dwarf Abjurer, for instance, generates anywhere from 35-129 hit points (depending on how many of their slots are Abjurations), +2 per ritual.

Good nitpick, and acknowledged.

However, I don't know where you're getting 35 as a minimum. I don't remember offhand what racial spells a Mark of Warding Dwarf gets (Hold Portal?) but I'm sure it's minimal, at most a free 1st and 2nd level spell per day, which even if they're both Abjuration spells would be only 6 HP, not 35. Why isn't it 0-129?

LudicSavant

2020-09-22, 03:50 PM

I don't know where you're getting 35 as a minimum though.

11*2+5 (base ward) +8 (racial spells).

Satori01

2020-09-22, 04:06 PM

MaxWilson

2020-09-22, 04:17 PM

You get a free cast of Mage Armor, Alarm, and at 3rd level Arcane Lock.
So I'm counting 8 points of Arcane Ward regeneration from the racial spells.

Every little bit helps. Project Ward with the backing of Eldritch Protector Cannon would be noticeable. A regular supply of Temp HP makes any source of damage reduction, no matter how paltry, vastly more impactful.

Wow, three racial spells? Neat. Although Arcane Lock costs 25 gp to cast, which is less neat.

I bet a Mark of Warding Moon Druid would be super-fun for a combat-heavy campaign. Mage Armor already goes well with wildshape, and then Armor of Agathys on top would just be brutal for your attackers. And then realize that you get double mileage out of Armor of Agathys (against most enemies) when you're in forms with nonweapon resistance, like Fire Elemental form. And you're still doing all the normal druid stuff at the same time like summoning Quicklings and throwing Plant Growth/Spike Growth all over the place.

diplomancer

2020-09-22, 04:17 PM

I'm curious as to what you mean by the above?

So if WOTC publishes an adventure with a site specific feature....say a Temple to Sea God...like Umberele, that contains a sacrificial drowning pool that has Specific Drowning rules that only apply to that spot...then that is ok, and official, and we on this board can talk about it.....all other scenarios are "house rules", and, henceforth, never to be referred to?

Is your position that we can only consider scenarios that have been published?

The game has millions of players, around the world. I don't think that all D&D Gaming 'tables' in all the world, are just playing with official products.

Imagining ways to represent special places, is the game, no matter the edition.

The game has rules for drowning, as it has rules for cold. If your table (or a specific published adventure) has further rules, obviously take that into account.

So, I'm suggesting that we take into account, for build guides , the main published rules of the game . Unless I'm writing a guide for a specific adventure path, I wouldn't even take into consideration adventure path special rules. From what I've seen, guide writers seldom take into account even the optional rules in the DMG like flanking, tumbling, etc.

What I really am not suggesting is for guide writers to write guides taking into account possible house rules. Unless you are the DM writing a guide for your players.

MaxWilson

2020-09-22, 04:30 PM

What I really am not suggesting is for guide writers to write guides taking into account possible house rules. Unless you are the DM writing a guide for your players.

If you're writing a "guide" about wizards, for instance, there are no set rules for how the DM is going to handle illusions, or what happens when you Reduce a creature, stuff it in a too-small hole, and then cease concentrating on Reduce. The DM is going to have to rule on what happens, but not every DM will rule the same way. Isn't the guide incomplete if it doesn't discuss the possibilities and give suggestions on how to take advantage of any particular ruling?

LudicSavant

2020-09-22, 04:45 PM

There are a lot of stereotypes in D&D that hold people back in terms of character building, like 'clerics are just healbots.'

'Wizards are squishy' is one of these. Like, you'll never hear people say "hey, GWM Champion, you should never even consider being on the front line!"

But the thing is, it's not actually difficult to get a Wizard up to at least the durability of said GWM Champion, and you don't need to be an Abjurer, let alone a Forge Abjurer, to do it. Just 'grab armor+shield somehow, and occasionally cast a defensive spell' is sufficient all on its own.

LudicSavant

2020-09-22, 05:04 PM

Wow, three racial spells? Neat. Although Arcane Lock costs 25 gp to cast, which is less neat.

Not for a Warding Dwarf, it doesn't. They do it free. :smallsmile:

Wards and Seals.

You can cast the alarm and mage armor spells with this trait. Starting at 3rd level, you can also cast the arcane lock spell with it. Once you cast any of these spells with this trait, you can't cast that spell with it again until you finish a long rest. Intelligence is your spellcasting ability for these spells, and you don't need material components for them when you cast them with this trait.

That reminds me, I've recently come to have a greater respect for Arcane Lock, thanks to a clever Warding Dwarf player in my Sunday game. According to him, Arcane Lock is secretly a special kind of low level Wall spell that allows your allies to walk/fire through it, but not your enemies. It just requires him to only target certain dungeon squares with it.

Surprisingly effective, if situational. The fact that you can open the door, fire through, and close it again and it re-locks is just something I had entirely overlooked until he started playing a Warding Dwarf.

Like, it's situational enough that I probably still wouldn't prepare it or spend 25gp on it, but that matters a lot less when you're getting it for free, just have it laying around, and occasionally run into a situation where you notice you can squish an encounter with barely any Loss Ratios with it. Not bad at all for something I had previously only thought of as mostly being a ribbon that recharged Ward.

Evaar

2020-09-22, 06:00 PM

There are a lot of stereotypes in D&D that hold people back in terms of character building, like 'clerics are just healbots.'

Man, that really sums up my irritation with a lot of D&D groups.

That reminds me, I've recently come to have a greater respect for Arcane Lock, thanks to a clever Warding Dwarf player in my Sunday game. According to him, Arcane Lock is secretly a special kind of low level Wall spell that allows your allies to walk/fire through it, but not your enemies. It just requires him to only target certain dungeon squares with it.

Surprisingly effective, if situational. The fact that you can open the door, fire through, and close it again and it re-locks is just something I had entirely overlooked until he started playing a Warding Dwarf.

Like, it's situational enough that I probably still wouldn't prepare it or spend 25gp on it, but that matters a lot less when you're getting it for free, just have it laying around, and occasionally run into a situation where you notice you can squish an encounter with barely any Loss Ratios with it. Not bad at all for something I had previously only thought of as mostly being a ribbon that recharged Ward.

Not only that but I've been playing DotMM and we're in a level where there's sort of a central hub of enemies. We've been skirting around it and picking guys off, and in a lot of cases we're sealing off doors so that they can't rush up behind us as we're in an encounter with another group. We've been doing it with Marvelous Pigments, but Arcane Lock would be just as effective and less reliant on our luck of having obtained those pigments. There are many dungeon-crawling scenarios were a door is a risk, and being able to remove it from play acts as insurance while you deal with what's in front of you (or what's around the corner, as the case may be).

Satori01

2020-09-22, 06:06 PM

That reminds me, I've recently come to have a greater respect for Arcane Lock, thanks to a clever Warding Dwarf player in my Sunday game. According to him, Arcane Lock is secretly a special kind of low level Wall spell that allows your allies to walk/fire through it, but not your enemies. It just requires him to only target certain dungeon squares with it.

Surprisingly effective, if situational. The fact that you can open the door, fire through, and close it again and it re-locks is just something I had entirely overlooked until he started playing a Warding Dwarf.

Like, it's situational enough that I probably still wouldn't prepare it or spend 25gp on it, but that matters a lot less when you're getting it for free, just have it laying around, and occasionally run into a situation where you notice you can squish an encounter with barely any Loss Ratios with it. Not bad at all for something I had previously only thought of as mostly being a ribbon that recharged Ward.

In 1e I would call Hold Portal, 'Portable Portcullis' ...and Arcane Lock is much better than Hold Portal.

The racial spells recharge 8 Arcane Ward Hit Points, at 7th Character level (6Wiz/ 1 cleric), the Arcane Ward has a maximum value of 12 + INT modifier.

Assuming the character expends every spell slot they have plus Arcane Recovery on Abjuration spells, this amounts to 50 Arcane Ward Hit Points.
This is enough to replenish a 16 Hit Point Maximum Arcane Ward roughly 2 1/2 times.

Unless the Wizard is getting help from being able to liberally cast Alarm as a Ritual Spell, achieving this amount of damage reduction requires every single spell slot they have.

A 7th level Mark of Making Artillerist Artificer, with 20 INT, is adding an average of 10 Temp HP to most likely at least 2 PCs a round.

Barring the Eldritch Canon getting blowed up, it typical costs the Artificer no spell slot resources for this.

I just don't think the Wizard can keep up, in terms of the numbers with the Artillerist.

diplomancer

2020-09-22, 06:39 PM

If you're writing a "guide" about wizards, for instance, there are no set rules for how the DM is going to handle illusions, or what happens when you Reduce a creature, stuff it in a too-small hole, and then cease concentrating on Reduce. The DM is going to have to rule on what happens, but not every DM will rule the same way. Isn't the guide incomplete if it doesn't discuss the possibilities and give suggestions on how to take advantage of any particular ruling?

But those are not houserules (like creating new cold weather problems for heavy armor users). Yes, it's a good thing to discuss some known problems with different DM rulings when you are discussing builds. If you are going to talk about Shield Master, and whether the feat is worth taking for a build, for instance, you should make a note of the many different rulings that are known to exist.

This are really not hard and fast rules for guide writing, there are value judgements involved. I fully admit that, though I've read pretty much every guide published here, I have never written one. What is "a well known and relevant ruling issue"? Only the guide writer will decide that (and, after getting input from others, will either review that decision or not).

On the other hand, having read a LOT of guides, I've never seen one mention "well, before making a character that will depend on Heavy Armor, check if your DM has special rules about them in very cold weather."

There are a lot of stereotypes in D&D that hold people back in terms of character building, like 'clerics are just healbots.'

'Wizards are squishy' is one of these. Like, you'll never hear people say "hey, GWM Champion, you should never even consider being on the front line!"

But the thing is, it's not actually difficult to get a Wizard up to at least the durability of said GWM Champion, and you don't need to be an Abjurer, let alone a Forge Abjurer, to do it. Just 'grab armor+shield somehow, and occasionally cast a defensive spell' is sufficient all on its own.

With the very Mark of Warding artificer/abjurer I suggested, I had that experience of the Paladin telling me to "stay back", and then be surprised when I was the last man standing in some very deadly combats :)

Alpharn_999

2020-09-23, 08:42 AM

diplomancer

2020-09-23, 11:07 AM

Small question on a specific variant of the Mark of Warding dwarf Forge Cleric/Abjurer; assuming an environment where +X magic items are common and expected, would Life Cleric be more flexible?

Never mind, just reread the first post. :P

Rereading the first post at your prompting, I noticed an interesting example about "addressing usual ways DMs deal with things"

When talking about the Artificer dip, Ludic Savant mentions the "holding a tool in your hands to cast a spell Artificer problem", and how that might downgrade the artificer dip if your DM is a stickler for those rules. It's a good point, and should be mentioned (as those are the actual rules in the books), but I have yet to meet a DM (including myself the few times I've DMed) that enforces those rules strictly. Not letting you cast a V spell in a zone of silence, yes, pretty much every DM will do it; caring about what you are holding where in the middle of an exciting combat when no special restrictions apply, less so. It just slows combat down for a relatively small gain, specially if you have to stop and reference each spell before you cast it.

Frogreaver

2020-09-23, 11:59 AM

LudicSavant

2020-09-23, 01:35 PM

Rereading the first post at your prompting, I noticed an interesting example about "addressing usual ways DMs deal with things"

When talking about the Artificer dip, Ludic Savant mentions the "holding a tool in your hands to cast a spell Artificer problem", and how that might downgrade the artificer dip if your DM is a stickler for those rules. It's a good point, and should be mentioned (as those are the actual rules in the books), but I have yet to meet a DM (including myself the few times I've DMed) that enforces those rules strictly. Not letting you cast a V spell in a zone of silence, yes, pretty much every DM will do it; caring about what you are holding where in the middle of an exciting combat when no special restrictions apply, less so. It just slows combat down for a relatively small gain, specially if you have to stop and reference each spell before you cast it.

Yeah.

Components are a dicey topic. Perhaps the most unloved component rule is the bizarre "S+M is easier to cast than just S" rule.

It's basically the perfect storm of problems. It's unintuitive. It's complicated. And perhaps most of all, it's almost impossible to actually enforce at the table without dramatically slowing the game down, because there's no real pattern to which hundreds of spells are SM and which are just S and you, the overworked DM, are gonna have to check every time anyone casts a spell.

On a related note, some folks will be surprised to hear that I actually don't post the most powerful RAW or RAI tricks I know about. For example I generally won't talk about simulacrum loops or superman demiplanes or extreme body-swapping shenanigans or anything else that I think would have made the cut for the old "Campaign Smasher" list on the WotC CharOp boards (back before WotC nuked their own forums in the unholy name of Gleemax).

Trouble is, some people's standards for 'broken cheese' are way, way lower than that. Like some folks will even cry cheese at just using GWM to do basic GWM things :smalltongue:

Oddly, the lower their standards for 'cheese' are, the more vocal and angry they seem to get when claiming that 'nobody would allow X.' Even if we know full well that plenty of people allow X and have played in plenty of different groups that allow X and even the designers of the game say they run it as X.

Most claims of 'nobody would allow X' I've seen seem to be based on a small sample size and not really pan out when we go and check. Great example of that can be found in the Create Bonfire thread going on right now, where when people actually got polled lots of people were fine with the RAW way, or liked it better than the suggested alternative that is how a poster claimed supposedly 'everyone' would run it.

MaxWilson

2020-09-23, 01:47 PM

Yeah.

Components are a dicey topic. Perhaps the most unloved component rule is the bizarre "S+M is easier to cast than just S" rule.

It's basically the perfect storm of problems. It's unintuitive. It's complicated.

It's also dubious from a RAW standpoint (as opposed to a Sage Advice standpoint, which unambiguously backs the bizarre interpretation with an explicit example).

Sage Advice says this:

Another example: a cleric’s holy symbol is emblazoned on her shield. She likes to wade into melee combat with a mace in one hand and a shield in the other. She uses the holy symbol as her spellcasting focus, so she needs to have the shield in hand when she casts a cleric spell that has a material component. If the spell, such as aid, also has a somatic component, she can perform that component with the shield hand and keep holding the mace in the other.

If the same cleric casts cure wounds, she needs to put the mace or the shield away, because that spell doesn’t have a material component but does have a somatic component. She’s going to need a free hand to make the spell’s gestures. If she had the War Caster feat, she could ignore this restriction.

However, from a RAW standpoint, the relevant rule is this: A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus -- but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components.

That rule doesn't look to me like it's giving you permission to cast spells without a free hand just because you have a holy symbol on your shield. All the actual rule is saying is that if you put your mace away in order to have a free hand for Aid's somatic components, you do not also need a second free hand to perform the material components. One free hand is enough.

But a cleric with a mace and shield in hand has no free hands, so cannot cast Aid or Cure Wounds.

Ergo, Sage Advice is wrong and this whole problem was created by Jeremy Crawford and Sage Advice, not by RAW.

diplomancer

2020-09-23, 01:56 PM

It's also dubious from a RAW standpoint (as opposed to a Sage Advice standpoint, which unambiguously backs the bizarre interpretation with an explicit example).

Sage Advice says this:

Another example: a cleric’s holy symbol is emblazoned on her shield. She likes to wade into melee combat with a mace in one hand and a shield in the other. She uses the holy symbol as her spellcasting focus, so she needs to have the shield in hand when she casts a cleric spell that has a material component. If the spell, such as aid, also has a somatic component, she can perform that component with the shield hand and keep holding the mace in the other.

If the same cleric casts cure wounds, she needs to put the mace or the shield away, because that spell doesn’t have a material component but does have a somatic component. She’s going to need a free hand to make the spell’s gestures. If she had the War Caster feat, she could ignore this restriction.

However, from a RAW standpoint, the relevant rule is this: A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus -- but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components.

That rule doesn't look to me like it's giving you permission to cast spells without a free hand just because you have a holy symbol on your shield. All the actual rule is saying is that if you put your mace away in order to have a free hand for Aid's somatic components, you do not also need a second free hand to perform the material components. One free hand is enough.

But a cleric with a mace and shield in hand has no free hands, so cannot cast Aid or Cure Wounds.

Ergo, Sage Advice is wrong and this whole problem was created by Jeremy Crawford and Sage Advice, not by RAW.

I think this is all the fault of the warcaster feat, for adding an ability that should be already a given. The other two bullet points of the feat are good enough to make it a good feat, and the existence of this third bullet point encourages some DMs to make it a Feat tax for some builds.

MaxWilson

2020-09-23, 02:34 PM

I think this is all the fault of the warcaster feat, for adding an ability that should be already a given. The other two bullet points of the feat are good enough to make it a good feat, and the existence of this third bullet point encourages some DMs to make it a Feat tax for some builds.

What makes you say that the ability to cast with your hands full should be a given?

I can see an argument that it should be a class ability of e.g. Eldritch Knights and Paladins (although I'm glad it isn't--Paladins already have special spells with Verbal-only components that they can cast with their hands full), but why should it be a given for everyone?

LudicSavant

2020-09-23, 02:55 PM

Small question on a specific variant of the Mark of Warding dwarf Forge Cleric/Abjurer; assuming an environment where +X magic items are common and expected, would Life Cleric be more flexible?

Never mind, just reread the first post. :P

Yeah, if +X magic items are common, don't take Forge Domain. Take one of the other Green or Blue options in the first post.

Speaking of Life Cleric Wizards though, they're great. Here's a build for one.

Alright, Healing Wizard! Not only can Wizards be a healer, but they can be a damned good one. We're not talking a cut rate off-healer like a Thief Rogue that took the Healer feat, oh no, we're talking about a character who can outheal most Clerics and still have time left over to throw Fireballs and Webs and Walls of Force and what-have-you. A full blown main party healer that can throw down 4 digits of healing a day, burst heal in combat, cure status effects, mitigate like a king, repeatedly yo-yo not just the party but themselves, the works. Heck, they even get infinite non-combat healing at tier 4, because why not, you're a Wizard.

The Jorasco Physician
https://i.postimg.cc/x1tR7N5k/9f533e2cd4bce85b053b42c3039cee88.jpg

Halfling (Mark of Healing) Life Cleric 1 / Transmuter Wizard 19
Stats: Str 8, Dex 14, Con 15, Int 14, Wis 14, Cha 10
ASIs: Int 16 @5, Int 18 @9, Int 20 @13, Resilient and 16 Con @17, Alert @20
Cantrips (Wizard): Toll the Dead, Ray of Frost, Minor Illusion, Prestidigitation, Shape Water
Cantrips (Cleric): Guidance, Light, Mending
Tool Proficiencies: One of them should be Herbalism.

Alright so, as is often the case for prepared caster builds, you have a lot of tricks up your sleeve... so many in fact that I can't properly list them all in a reasonable-length post. As such I'm mostly going to be focusing on what's unique about this build, though you should remember that this is still very much a controller Wizard, too. You can do this and all the usual god wizard things.

Here’s a list of some of your noteworthy healing/mitigation tools:

1) You are exceptionally excellent at using potions. Not only can you make them with Herbalism (which you happen to have an inordinately large bonus to without even really trying because of Int+Prof+Guidance+Medical Intuition+Halfling Luck), but unlike most characters you can use multiple ones per round, without even using up your Action. Heck, you can even yo-yo yourself.

First, there’s your Familiar, who can deliver potions without using their Action, swiftly flying to wherever they need to be and administering the potion to an ally (per the DMG rules for doing so).

Second, there’s Unseen Servant, a ritual you can keep up more or less indefinitely due to its hour duration / no Concentration requirement. They can hand out potions too, using your bonus actions. Especially good at lower levels before you start getting really good bonus actions.

Those are the most noteworthy two, but summoned creatures and animated dead (if you’re into that sort of thing) can do it too. And when you get a Simulacrum, their Familiar and/or Unseen Servant can do it too.

Yes, this costs a little money, but it’s well worth it (particularly with the XGtE Herbalism rules) and can really get you out of a pinch with some surprisingly high burst healing, *or* yo-yoing multiple people *or* just keeping people healthy while simultaneously doing normal Wizard things. Even if you're impoverished and can only use this occasionally, having a few potions in your back pocket that you can use without a PC's action is a great safety net.

As early as level 2, for example, you can cast your racial Cure Wounds with your Action, Unseen Seer potion with your bonus action, and Familiar potion with the familiar’s action, all in the same turn, for a grand total of 4d4+1d8+9 (23.5) healing that you have the option of splitting between 3 targets. That’s basically a 100% burst heal for 1-2 characters, and it didn’t even cost you a single spell slot!

Remember, you can do this potion stuff with any Wizard. Use it. It’s great.

2) Conventional Healing Staples + Disciple of Life.
The Mark of Healing expands your spell list, allowing you to get all of the following as Wizard spells:

1st cure wounds, healing word
2nd lesser restoration, prayer of healing
3rd aura of vitality, mass healing word
4th aura of purity, aura of life
5th greater restoration

So, you get Healing Word, Cure Wounds, Lesser Restoration, Greater Restoration, Mass Healing Word, and Prayer of Healing… pretty much all the Cleric standbys… except you can stack them with the Wizard’s superior resource and action economy advantages, and of course Disciple of Life.

It also gives you...

3) Aura of Vitality + Disciple of Life. This is what the Life Cleric / Lore Bards kept spending their Magical Secrets on, and now you’re getting it on a full Wizard chassis!

Even if you just use it out of combat, this is 120 hit points spread around as you please (e.g. avoiding waste from overhealing) for a 3rd level slot. That’s incredibly efficient.

In combat, it’s using your bonus action for 2d6+5 (12) healing per round, which of course comes on top of whatever your other actions are doing. That’s a lot of healing to have every round as a bonus action. Remember, healing never misses; this can really cut into Team Monster’s DPR if your team isn't all that easy to hit. It's not too unusual for it to be enough to counter all damage from a fight, to all party members, and maybe even have healing left over to get rid of damage incurred in previous fights, at least if your party isn't just dumping AC and being completely reckless. It's basically the next best thing to pre-nerf Healing Spirit.

4) Arcane Recovery and other resources. Simply put, you have more spell slots than a Cleric, which means more healing, control, mitigation, etc.

Actually, you have a lot of things that stretch your healing resources longer. Contingency, Action-free potions, Panacea, a free Cure Wounds and Lesser Restoration from your race, Simulacrum, and eventually…

5) Infinite Healing. With Spell Mastery, you can pick up Healing Word for 1d4+8 (10.5), as a bonus action, at will.

That means infinite, slot-free healing out of combat. And all of the resources that would otherwise have gone to non-combat healing being redirected elsewhere.

It also means getting non-Concentration healing almost as high as DoL Aura of Vitality whenever you’re not spending your Action on leveled spells (for example, when slinging cantrips).

It also means that your Simulacrum does it too. So for example just doing that and Toll the Dead is 8d12 damage and 2d4+16 healing per round.

6) Racial Spells: You basically get a free 1st level and 2nd level spell slot from your race, which extends your resource efficiency a bit further.

The first is Cure Wounds, which is usually a poor use of a spell prepared but great for a freebie. To put it into perspective, it’s worth 9.5 hit points (or 19 when your Simulacrum gets it). Compare that to the Hill Dwarf getting 1 hit point / level and suddenly it sounds like a pretty good deal.

The second is Lesser Restoration, which is a lovely ‘seat belt’ spell, by which I mean you won’t always want it but when you do, you really do. It’s always nice to have someone in the party with this prepared.

7) Simulacrum. The biggest power spike spell in the game; this allows you to spend money for actions and spell slots at a rate that is a complete steal. Anything you do can now be doubled in a pinch (and your resourceless stuff can be doubled all the time). Even comes with its own Familiar. And can have different spells prepared from you.

8) Life Transference + DoL: A healing spell all Wizards get. 8d8+5 (41) is a big burst heal for a level 3 slot, which of course can stack with your bonus action or minion action heals for numbers comparable to the 6th level Heal spell, but split between multiple characters if you feel like it.

You basically can take someone from 0-full this way, though you take 4d8 yourself when you do so. Of course, your third level slots have a lot of really great options, so this has stiff competition and might not see much use, despite being a solid option.

9) Soul Cage + DoL: This spell lets you heal 2d8+8 hit points as a bonus action, 6 times a day (total 102 hp), no Concentration required. It also can be used for a variety of great information gathering effects, and an alright ability to influence d20 rolls (only alright because it requires a bonus action beforehand). The default fluff is Evil, but it’s really easy to refluff it as something that isn’t (I did so for my Wizard that was an acolyte of Wee Jas, who in my version is basically the psychopomp of the pantheon (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?450352-Wee-Jas-the-First-Lich)).

10) Contingency It lets you cast a 5th level spell, without an action, and with a spell slot you spent *last week* instead of on dungeoneering day.

Stacks with all your other action economy and resource shenanigans. Heck, even a Contingent Cure Wounds can pop you up to (average) 36 hit points automatically when you get reduced to zero.

11) Restore Life. If this has a tradeoff compared to other healer builds, it’s that you don’t get a way to revive dead PCs until level 15. Still, you do have one. And before that, you at least can get Gentle Repose so that you can cart a teammate’s body back to town for Revivify (it shouldn’t be that hard to find a 5th level spellcaster).

12) Panacea. Once or twice a day (because your Simulacrum makes transmuter’s stones too), you can fully heal any character’s HP, and remove all curses, diseases, and poisons affecting a creature.

This is like having the 9th level Power Word Heal, twice, without using your spell slots. Except it’s not even a spell, so you can totally cast a bonus action spell on the same turn! Yeah, it uses up your transmuter’s stone for the day, but it’s well worth it for what is essentially extra level 9 spells.

13) Transmuter’s Stone. Improve kiting, Con saves, or get Resistance to the damage type of whatever you’re fighting. You don’t even have to pick just one, you get to switch each time you cast a spell, so you can adapt to the situation. And when you eventually get a Simulacrum, they get to make one too.

14) Way better reactions. Clerics don’t get any reaction spells at all, Druids only get Absorb Elements, and Bards need to spend Magical Secrets to get theirs. You get all the best reaction spells, including Shield, Counterspell, Absorb Elements, and Feather Fall, all of which are great damage mitigators

15) You are not a squishy, d6 HD be damned. The idea that Wizards have to be squishy is even more wrong than the idea that Wizards can’t heal. The difference between a d6 and d10 HD is just 40 hit points by level 20 (or 38 in the case of this build, since you start with a Cleric level). That’s worth less than the effective hit point value of a single low-mid level spell slot for you.

Meanwhile, you’ve got armor, shield, and all the defensive spells that make everyone say an Eldritch Knight is the tankiest Fighter, except with way more spell slots. And access to higher level defensive spells. And healing that vastly outstrips Second Wind and can just repeatedly burst yourself to full.

Now I’m not setting out to build a primary tank build here, but you can totally switch hit for the frontliner to relieve some pressure and spread damage around the party (which makes AoE healing more efficient). Or just position more aggressively, without worrying about needing to spend actions or slots escaping if enemies manage to engage on you.

Also, your defenses help your Concentration (you don't make a save if the enemy misses. Also, Absorb Elements can lower Concentration DCs) and spell slots (you don't need to cast Mage Armor, and you'll need Shield less often if they miss your base AC more).

16) Making it safe to rest. This is another thing that Wizards already do -- using things like Leomund’s Tiny Hut or Rope Trick or Alarm to make it easier for the party to rest, and thus heal up and replenish resources. That’s healing too.

17) All the crazy @#$% that control Wizards normally do to make Team Monster’s rate of damage slow to a crawl, whether that's polymorphing people into 158 hp Giant Apes, trapping foes in Walls of Force, making strategic use of vision blockers, whatever. And the slower damage comes in, the more effective healing is, pound for pound.

So yeah, like I said, not only are Wizards able to fill the healer role, they do so quite well, with efficient action economy, burst, and sustained healing, and tons of control and mitigation.

Additional Notes

We come online immediately, and only get stronger as we progress. At level 2 we're already a strong healer due to our slot efficiency (Arcane Recovery + Racial Cure Wounds slot + No need for Mage Armor and less frequent need for Shield + potion use + Disciple of Life) and action economy (potentially able to heal with our action, bonus action, and familiar's action. All in the same turn if we like).

At level 20 we have literally infinite noncombat healing, massive burst heals (including 2x 'Power Word Heal'-level effects per day that don't even eat our spell slots), efficient in-combat healing options, multiple sources of self-yo-yo healing, and the ability to cure pretty much any status. In addition to, you know, being level 20 Wizards and all the nice things that come with that.

And we have a smooth progression between point A and point B.

Wondering what to do with Minor Alchemy? Here's some fun ideas:
- Carve durable substances with a precision and speed that would be impossible for even a master smith by turning them into a more easily workable substance, and working that before the duration expires. Consider taking up a tool proficiency to go with this, and you can create very fine metallic or precious stone goods in a tiny fraction of the time, without even having access to a forge. You can whittle a chunk of metal into whatever tool you want on demand. As well as smuggling weapons into places that don't want you to have weapons.
- Get through locks or chains, more quietly than Knock, and even if the prison guards took away your spell components.
- Scam people by temporarily turning less valuable materials into far more valuable ones. Can combine with the carving above to make fake priceless art objects. I don't recommend just outright selling these (since in a magical world rich merchants are likely to know this is possible and institute an hour wait or some such countermeasure), but instead combining it with traditional con artist techniques. Someone's about to miss the opportunity of a lifetime!
- Transmute a very heavy material into a very light one, throw it or launch it from something (maybe even the Catapult spell), then end Concentration mid-flight. How effective this is is a DM judgment, but in real life the forces involved could get extremely large, enough to smash reinforced walls and such.
- Silver your weapons if you're going to be fighting something vulnerable to that.
- Collapse structures by turning the base of load bearing pillars / support structures into a material that can't support the weight.

We are pretty good at ability checks all around, thanks to Halfling Luck + a well-rounded statline + Guidance, not to mention bonuses to Herbalism and Medicine from Mark of Healing. Remember that Guidance is a bigger bonus than Expertise in tier 1. You can further toss in the Skill Empowerment spell later, for more skillmonkeying. Your familiar really helps out too. Among other things, they're a scout with Darkvision and a fairly hefty 18 passive perception (with Keen Senses). And of course the Wizard is just oozing amazing utility spells.

We are extra good at Herbalism and Medicine without particularly trying to be, because of our race. For example for Herbalism we get a whopping Int + Prof + Halfling Luck + Guidance + Mark bonus (so, +11+2d4+Rerolling 1s). This means we should familiarize ourselves with the uses of these skills, since we're basically always gonna ace checks with them. In the case of Herbalism, you can find various ideas for ways to use it in XGtE, the most notable of which is of course crafting 25gp healing potions. In the case of Medicine, this skill is oft maligned because people rightly point out that the ability to stabilize people is basically worthless since Healing Kits do that without a check. However, skills needn't be limited to on-the-book uses; I suggest seeing if you can use it for forensics ("how long has this man been dead? What killed him?) and as an additional knowledge skill ("This kind of monster inflicts these kinds of poisonous wounds, nasty things, I had to learn how to treat them").

Use your rituals. Try to always have at least one going. Remember, you can still move around and such while casting rituals.

As for saving throws, we don't really have a clear "weak link" save to target, thanks to Halfling Luck + a well-rounded statline + proficiency in Wis, Cha, and Con saves and Int as a primary main stat. And of course stuff that mitigates the impact on failing saves, like vision blockers (many effects require enemies to see you), elemental Resistance effects, Counterspell, status cures, Contingency, etc.

We get 5 extra spells prepared and 3 extra cantrips from our Cleric dip. You get Cure Wounds and Bless prepared from your Domain, then 3 more. Good options to prep from the Cleric list are Protection from Evil and Good, Healing Word, Sanctuary, Shield of Faith, and (at least until your Int outscales your Wis at 5), Command.

For cantrips, we obviously are going to take Guidance and spam it at every opportunity for bonuses to skills and initiative checks. And then we can grab two utility cantrips that don’t care about your Wisdom, like Light and Mending.

For Wizard cantrips, I recommend Toll the Dead, maybe another attack cantrip like Ray of Frost or Create Bonfire (if you've got a grappler/Repelling Blaster/Booming Blader or the like with you), and your choice of utility cantrips. I picked Prestidigitation, Minor Illusion, and Shape Water, because I like them both mechanically and thematically (because they’d all be really useful for a doctor). I don’t care which of these you take first, as long as one of them is Toll the Dead.

One of the downsides of the Mark of Healing halfling is that it doesn't have an Int bonus, but that's okay; this is one of the rare cases where I'd say it's still worth it. Early on, keep an eye out for spells that are just as good with a little less Int. For example, Magic Missile doesn't need to roll attack or make someone fail a save, and is one of the best single target damage spells in a level 1 and level 2 slot (it outdamages Scorching Ray on average unless an enemy's AC is very low, or you're getting Advantage on all the attacks). But don't be too picky about this; it's just a +1, you can still take whatever spells you want.

Aura of Vitality doesn't need you to see, so Concentration-free vision blockers like Pyrotechnics are even better than usual. This also synergizes with Alert.

Variants
You can turn any Wizard subclass into a healing build using the technique shown here, not just Transmuter. I only picked them because they're further specialized in that regard and they don't get a lot of screentime on these forums.
The core of this build -- being a Wizard healer -- can actually work with any subclass! I just used Transmuter because it's rarely played and gives us a way to raise the dead, plus some extra healing abilities. But seriously, want to do this as an Evoker, Abjurer, Necromancer, Diviner, or War Wizard? You absolutely can. In fact, Evocation or Abjuration will save you money on picking up the Mark of Healing spells. Conjuration can make your Concentration unbreakable, and then you can just kinda… face-tank things. Necromancer can make every single Animated minion carry a potion. There's fun stuff to do.
Instead of starting with 15 Con and 14 Int, you could take 15 Int and an Int-based half-feat like Keen Mind at 5.
Instead of starting with 15 Con, you could start with 14 and make your statline even more well rounded. You could also switch out Res(Con) for whatever you want, too (after all, you can still get the proficiency from your Transmuter's Stone, Res:Con just frees you up to give it to someone else).
If you roll for stats, you might have more space for ASIs. In that case, some options are Lucky, War Caster, and plain old +2 Con ASIs (which I prefer over Tough).
As always, the power creep that is Ravnica Backgrounds exists. Selesnya is a pretty good pick for Warding Bond and Plant Growth. Dimir and Orzhov add good spells, too.