[Optimization]Why caster ability score+2 is a horrible choice

[KorvinStarmast]

Casters gain little benefits from high caster ability score in 5E

That is not what my experience shows.

... can get out your deck chair and foot stool and starts eating grapes, whilst criticizing the fighters blade technique and noisily spitting out the seeds.

Good idea, unless the enemy has archers. Then, dodge.

A +1 to hit matters. Saving throw DC matters. For prepared casters it gives you one more spell to prepare. For various class abilities it gives you one more use per long rest.

+1.

[Composer99]

Casters gain little benefits from high caster ability score in 5E, without bonus spell slot, all they get is +1 attack roll for SOME spells which isn't even worth 0.5 feat. Basically wizard, cleric, druid and sorcerer should never choose caster ability score+2 unless they have a strong reason to do so, such as a Eldritch Blast build. Intelligence/Wisdom even isn't the most important ability score for wizard/cleric/druid, dexterity and Constitution are.

If you were going with "some spell loadouts fitting certain concepts for 'fullcasters' don't need higher spellcasting abilties", then... sure, yeah, I suppose.

If you're trying to argue this as a general or universal point, then no. Can't agree. Especially not if this thread is ostensibly about char-op.

You might prioritise some combination of boosting Dexterity or Constitution or picking up a feat you really want before topping up your spellcasting ability, and that's fine if it works for you.

But saying a spellcaster whose offence and spell loadout depends on their spellcasting ability modifier should "never" increase their spellcasting ability without a strong reason is preposterous - the dependence on the spellcasting ability modifier is the strong reason.

[Lille]

I'm now wondering what eight feats a theoretical 5 int wizard would even take. Never mind where they got the extra three from, this is a very theoretical wizard.

Weapon Master, Savage Attacker, Grappler, and all five flavours of Elemental Adept?

[Pex]

Why 18 and not 20? Is an even ability modifier more important than an odd one, or is that just how the maths work out?

Game math. Only BBEGs have high AC and saves. It's supposed to be harder, so it won't make a difference. You need teamwork, so buffing someone else or someone buffing you is key plus combat tactics. In general play bad guys aren't having 20s either. You keep up against their good saves. The feat you take is important enough to you to make a difference else you wouldn't have taken it, even if it's not Resilient CON or Warcaster. Healer makes a difference. Inspiring Leader makes a difference. Maybe you diversified with Magic Initiate. Spellsniper could have been important to ignore cover and increase range. That flexibility gives you strength over the length of play. If there's no particular feat you really want or need for a particular character having a 20 at level 8 is of course very good in its own right. Not every spellcaster needs Resilient CON or War Caster even if casting Concentration spells. They're helpful feats, not must haves.

[Witty Username]

Important to point out, almost no spells require spell attack rolls beyond cantrips.

Depending on the caster, the casting stat can under optimized with little issue.
I would say the strongest in this regard are bard and wizard, as both have combat relevant spells that to not allow saves or use spell attack rolls. Sleep, fog cloud, wall of force, polymorph, grease(if uses for difficult terrain) are all effective spells at making the parties job easier. Even minor illusion requires opponents to spend an action for it to have any stat relation.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

Hmm, my Draconic Sorcerer gets a benefit to damage as well with his Chr, and a bump to his social proficiencies, which are relevant. My Cleric gets benefits to turning and a better Wiz save.
I take the point that there are good feats, and something like resilient Con is pretty good for a lot of characters. However I'll agree with most of the responses that the OP way overstates their case, and bumping your primary casting stat is in no way "horrible." It's at least a fair to good option, if not excellent.

[dragoeniex]

Spell save DC is "attack roll" for these spells...
A non-caster get +1 attack roll and +1 damage for most of her attack, but a caster usually can not always cast spells that benefits from high ability score.

That's an interesting way of looking at it. From that perspective, I would counter that a non-caster gets 1 - 3 "attack rolls" on an average turn, spiking higher on occasion. A caster, however, can use area of effect spells that can match or exceed that number of targets.

Let's say you cast Slow on an area with 4 enemies. Since your DC is what determines whether the effect lands, I would equate this to four "attack rolls." Two fail? You've landed 2 "hits." If, over the next couple rounds, Target 1 fails one more save and Target 2 fails twice more, you've landed 5 "hits" total.

We're using the term "hit" pretty loosely here, but the riding inconvenience on our opponents is definitely a strike against them.

A caster needs to land their offense every bit as much as a martial does. Which group is making or forcing more rolls is going to vary per round, but most casters are going to keep a save spell in their pocket for when they can hit as many foes as possible.

This all assumes you're building to have some control elements in your set. You could skip them, but they're popular (and fun!) for a reason.

[AvalancheSpring]

Keep in mind that a lot of the best spells are not "save or suck" but "MASS save or suck". Fairy Fire, Web, Hypnotic Pattern are arguably the best all around combat spells at level 1, 2, 3. They are trigger a ton of saves. So do Slow, Fireball, Mass Suggestion, Eyebite, Grease, Spirit Guardians to name a few spells that are very effective for their level.

OP calls out Clerics in the original post. But, the mainstay combo for mid level clerics - Spirit Guardians + Spiritual Weapon + (Weapon *or* attack cantrip) - is severely nerfed with a low Wis.

Treatmonk had a couple of builds for summoning heavy casters, like a conjuration wizard, that triggered very few saves. Those are mechanically effective with 14 casting stats, and could probably survive with 12 (though lack of preparations would be a huge pain at low levels). So are "pure buffing" builds (either self or team buffing), so yeah, your Arcane Knight is fine with a 10 or 12. But nearly all casters are going to rely on AOE saving throws for much of the game. Do you have to get to 20 asap. Of course not. And if playing a 10 wis Cleric is fun for you, go for it. But that's your preference, it is not "optimization".

[Eldariel]

Keep in mind that a lot of the best spells are not "save or suck" but "MASS save or suck". Fairy Fire, Web, Hypnotic Pattern are arguably the best all around combat spells at level 1, 2, 3. They are trigger a ton of saves. So do Slow, Fireball, Mass Suggestion, Eyebite, Grease, Spirit Guardians to name a few spells that are very effective for their level.

OP calls out Clerics in the original post. But, the mainstay combo for mid level clerics - Spirit Guardians + Spiritual Weapon + (Weapon *or* attack cantrip) - is severely nerfed with a low Wis.

Let's not forget that Clerics need to prepare whatever Rituals they want to use so they need spell prep even more than Wizards (Druids likewise).

Treatmonk had a couple of builds for summoning heavy casters, like a conjuration wizard, that triggered very few saves. Those are mechanically effective with 14 casting stats, and could probably survive with 12 (though lack of preparations would be a huge pain at low levels).

Of course, the best Wizard summoning spell, Summon Greater Demon, goes right back to using your casting stat as the creature gets saves to break free. Then there are spells like Counterspell and Dispel Magic where you need it for the stat check, and spells like Illusions where it's the opposed check base. There are just too many good spells that need casting stat to completely ignore it; such a Wizard will be much weaker than an all-rounder Wizard especially early on (on higher levels there are more spells like Animate Objects, Wall of Force and company that don't care).

That said, I do agree with the OP to a degree. Last Wizard I played I picked:
VH: Alert
4: Res: Con
8: Lucky

This was on a Diviner so I had a measure of control over the most important few saves and the rest was with AOE spells where I didn't mind someone succeeding the save all that much. I did really, really want 20 Int (it was a rolled character so I had 18 Int all throughout) on 8, but I felt I needed Lucky more since I kept failing Counterspell checks on unlucky rolls and that's just incredibly wasteful; I felt I'd get more out of the blanket protection against individual poor rolls (the chances of two poor rolls is much lower than one) on both Initiative (Alert character hates rolling 1 for Init) and Counterspell/such. The bonus of helping against SoX and making enemies roll crits is just icing on the cake. Diviner takes care of making enemies fail saves; this way I don't have to care about that.

I don't think any of my choices were wrong. I would've gone with Int on 12 (and if it were a point buy character, on 16 as well) but I simply felt like those feats did more for my efficiency than any amount of save DCs and spells prepared. The spell prepared was actually the biggest sticking point for me with having suboptimal Int but given it was a small party (3 characters: Swords Bard, Knowledge Cleric and my Diviner Wizard), high risk campaign (we fought plenty of CR Stupid encounters and indeed had already had two previous near-TPKs - my character was the only survivor of the initial party) and a significant number of opposing casters (three of our previous bigger enemies had all been spellcasters) I came to the conclusion that I needed for my spells to succeed and me being able to act first and not drop my spells more than anything (we lost one important hostage earlier in the campaign due to me failing my Concentration on Suggestion to a barrage of her allies' arrows).

[Chugger]

The OP gives bad advice so be careful - but it's not bad advice in all cases - the OP's probable is that he's being too general. I don't want to disrespect the OP or hurt their feelings - don't mean to do that - but let's talk about when this opinion is right and when it's wrong.

The famous "optimancer" Treantmonk almost always says to take Warcaster for a level four ASI for many cleric builds and some wizard builds (or resilient Con). Not Wis or Int. You need warcaster to function maybe and to maintain concentration on spells more than you need to up the casting stat _at this point_. But later on he almost always says to up the casting stat.

A moon druid that is going to wildshape often could possibly use feats that work in wildshape, like Lucky or others, more than they need any stat boost. Though some conc spells they might cast before going into wildshape might benefit from higher wis.

Many times you want the casting stat up - higher to hit - more spells for many classes - and harder to make STs.

[sithlordnergal]

So...maybe this is from me playing AL, and AL modules using creatures that have a CR closer to your current party level, but I find not boosting your casting stat is the number 1 way to make your spells useless. Case in point, I tried out a Half-Orc Cleric once while going through Out of the Abyss. I had to start with a 14 Wisdom and boosted it to 16 as soon as I could, and it worked out fine for levels 1 to 4. But as soon as I reached level 5, I found that my spells were no longer reliable, at all. Enemies succeeded on their saving throws as often as they failed, and a majority of the time the enemies only just barely succeeded. My spell DC was a 14, and usually they'd roll a 14, or I'd make a spell attack and miss by 1.

I eventually trashed the character at level 7 simply because I hated that my spells had such a high failure rate, and brought in a properly built caster, this time a Druid with an 18 Wisdom at level 6, and lo and behold, my spells suddenly became effective again. It was no longer a coin flip to determine if a target was going to make the save or not. It was at that point that I realized that, while the DMG did claim that things are balanced around Casters having a 14 in Tier 1 and 16 in Tier 2, the reality was that published books/adventures, as well as every homebrew I have ever played, was actually balanced around Casters have a 14 in Tier 1 and 18 in Tier 2. Enemies in Tier 1 games had about the same failure rate with a 14 in your casting stat as enemies did in Tier 2 when you have an 18 in your casting stat.

Meanwhile martial characters have it a bit easier. I find a 16 can serve a Martial character pretty well all the way to level 16, though you're kind of pushing it by level 12. Which kind of makes sense, NPC AC scales pretty slowly on average, and it scales a lot slower than NPC ability scores. Consider your standard CR 5 Elementals. Their AC ranges from 13 at the lowest, the Fire Elemental, to 17 at the highest, the Earth Elemental. Even if you only have a 16 in your attack stat and no magical by level 5, you still have a +6 to hit, meaning you only need to roll an 11 to hit an Earth Elemental.

But ability score wise, all of those elementals have a +3 or higher, usually higher, to at least two ability scores, with the exception of the Air Elemental that has a +5 to Dex and a pair of +2's. At level 5 a caster with a 16 in their casting stat will have a 14 DC, meaning those Elementals only need to roll an 11 minimum. Even if you target them with a Dex save, the only Elemental that needs a really high roll to beat a DC 14 is the Earth Elemental. Everything else needs to roll between 10-12.

[shipiaozi]

So...maybe this is from me playing AL, and AL modules using creatures that have a CR closer to your current party level, but I find not boosting your casting stat is the number 1 way to make your spells useless. Case in point, I tried out a Half-Orc Cleric once while going through Out of the Abyss. I had to start with a 14 Wisdom and boosted it to 16 as soon as I could, and it worked out fine for levels 1 to 4. But as soon as I reached level 5, I found that my spells were no longer reliable, at all. Enemies succeeded on their saving throws as often as they failed, and a majority of the time the enemies only just barely succeeded. My spell DC was a 14, and usually they'd roll a 14, or I'd make a spell attack and miss by 1.

I eventually trashed the character at level 7 simply because I hated that my spells had such a high failure rate, and brought in a properly built caster, this time a Druid with an 18 Wisdom at level 6, and lo and behold, my spells suddenly became effective again. It was no longer a coin flip to determine if a target was going to make the save or not. It was at that point that I realized that, while the DMG did claim that things are balanced around Casters having a 14 in Tier 1 and 16 in Tier 2, the reality was that published books/adventures, as well as every homebrew I have ever played, was actually balanced around Casters have a 14 in Tier 1 and 18 in Tier 2. Enemies in Tier 1 games had about the same failure rate with a 14 in your casting stat as enemies did in Tier 2 when you have an 18 in your casting stat.

Meanwhile martial characters have it a bit easier. I find a 16 can serve a Martial character pretty well all the way to level 16, though you're kind of pushing it by level 12. Which kind of makes sense, NPC AC scales pretty slowly on average, and it scales a lot slower than NPC ability scores. Consider your standard CR 5 Elementals. Their AC ranges from 13 at the lowest, the Fire Elemental, to 17 at the highest, the Earth Elemental. Even if you only have a 16 in your attack stat and no magical by level 5, you still have a +6 to hit, meaning you only need to roll an 11 to hit an Earth Elemental.

But ability score wise, all of those elementals have a +3 or higher, usually higher, to at least two ability scores, with the exception of the Air Elemental that has a +5 to Dex and a pair of +2's. At level 5 a caster with a 16 in their casting stat will have a 14 DC, meaning those Elementals only need to roll an 11 minimum. Even if you target them with a Dex save, the only Elemental that needs a really high roll to beat a DC 14 is the Earth Elemental. Everything else needs to roll between 10-12.

My theory and practice both show ability score does little for casters, even +4 int/wis don't worth a feat. Remember +4 caster ability score only equals +2 attack roll for some spells. Do you think replace a +1 weapon with two feats would "make your martial attack" useless? No, they would boost your characters. Caster ability score are extremely useless for Druid because most of times you should cast summon and heal spells, I even want to replace 8 wisdom with one extra feat if I have chance lol

[sophontteks]

My theory and practice both show ability score does little for casters, even +4 int/wis don't worth a feat. Remember +4 caster ability score only equals +2 attack roll for some spells. Do you think replace a +1 weapon with two feats would "make your martial attack" useless? No, they would boost your characters. Caster ability score are extremely useless for Druid because most of times you should cast summon and heal spells, I even want to replace 8 wisdom with one extra feat if I have chance lol

Apples to oranges.

Few spells use spell attack. Spellcasters use DC saves mostly. There are far fewer ways to modify these rolls outside of increasing an ability score, there are very few ways to cast more then one of these spells per turn, very few ways to get advantage/disadvantage, and the caster only has a limited pool of these spells.

The DC directly determines whether the caster will be making a game-changing round, or spending their round being completely useless.

You begin this by claiming +4 ability score is not worth a feat?!?

[zinycor]

My theory and practice both show ability score does little for casters, even +4 int/wis don't worth a feat. Remember +4 caster ability score only equals +2 attack roll for some spells. Do you think replace a +1 weapon with two feats would "make your martial attack" useless? No, they would boost your characters. Caster ability score are extremely useless for Druid because most of times you should cast summon and heal spells, I even want to replace 8 wisdom with one extra feat if I have chance lol

What if as a druid you cast polymorph or hold monster? I get that there are builds that might not need a high casting stat, which is fine. But that is still far from saying that it is useless.

[MoiMagnus]

this time a Druid with an 18 Wisdom at level 6, and lo and behold, my spells suddenly became effective again.

I'm assuming 70% of this feeling was placebo and luck. You only get 10 spells per LR. So assuming all your spells are used for single-target offensive spells (you might use some of them on multiple targets at once, or multiple saves on the same monster, but you will use others on none, so it compensates), and that you use all your spell slots every day, then it makes a difference once every two LR. If you rarely run out of spells, that's even less frequent.

[At the contrary, martial get damage boost from the ability score, so they have some direct benefit on every strike]

I'm much more convinced by arguments saying that more of the spellcasting ability also gives you more spells prepared, so more chances to have the adequate spell in the adequate circumstance. Since at low level you don't have that many spells prepared, that can be huge.

[RSP]

Questioning whether (essentially a 5% increase in success) is worth a Feat is fine. However, the general statement that “a Feat is always better for a caster” is not along the lines of being optimized, for reasons already stated.

[Valmark]

My theory and practice both show ability score does little for casters, even +4 int/wis don't worth a feat. Remember +4 caster ability score only equals +2 attack roll for some spells. Do you think replace a +1 weapon with two feats would "make your martial attack" useless? No, they would boost your characters. Caster ability score are extremely useless for Druid because most of times you should cast summon and heal spells, I even want to replace 8 wisdom with one extra feat if I have chance lol

The problem here is that you aren't considering everything else:

- Higher DCs, which is not equivalent to better attack rolls. DCs have a lower base when compared to AC and are harder to increase, so your stat is a bigger deal;
- Spells prepared. This isn't an issue for all casters, but those who do have spells prepared benefit a lot from those few more spells;
- Higher damage or healing (for example a cleric's Spiritual Weapon);
- Various features that are more or less dependant on your casting stat;
- if your class has it, Counterspell/Dispel Magic benefits a LOT from the stat since proficiency score isn't applied. Or even when you're into a Forcecage (that seems to be far less rare then it looks in my experience).

In your example, druids use their casting stat for healing. Given the randomness of healing, flat bonuses are extremely useful- this without considering that Healing Spirit heals more times with an higher wisdom, which is way more then a simple +1/+2.

Can you tell us about your practice? Because both theory and practice of nearly everybody here says the opposite.

You can play a caster without save/attack/check spells but you'll surely be a worst caster unless you have a strong alternative option for encounters. And most of the best spells do need your casting stat.

[Nhorianscum]

So, purely for combat optimization in tier 1 the OP's argument does hold true. The strongest options here have no connection whatsoever to our casting stat.

It falls apart completely in any other situation.

[zinycor]

So, purely for combat optimization in tier 1 the OP's argument does hold true.

It falls apart completely in any other situation.

On tier 1, you get less spells prepared. So if you are a level 4 druid with 8 wis you get a grand total of 3 spells prepared. Which is very, very few.

[Valmark]

So, purely for combat optimization in tier 1 the OP's argument does hold true. The strongest options here have no connection whatsoever to our casting stat.

It falls apart completely in any other situation.

You are missing the spells prepared matter- and strongest options vary from group to group. Plus you can't really fling spells willy-nilly at early levels, and cantrips do rely on casting stat.

A Faerie Fire with a DC of 9 won't get you very far, for example. Or when the magic healing in your group goes from 0 to 7, or when the wizard needs to hit with the Firebolt, etc.

EDIT: The OP's example went as low as a 5 in the casting stat. A wizard would need at least 5 levels before being able to prepare any spell at all beyond the minimum of 1.

[JackPhoenix]

- Higher DCs, which is not equivalent to better attack rolls. DCs have a lower base when compared to AC and are harder to increase, so your stat is a bigger deal;

In addition to that, you CAN (through high ability modifier and the few magic items that do increase the save DC) get your save DC high enough that the enemy can't make the save at all. Unlike attack rolls, there's no automatic failure or success on saves (beyond the fact there's no point in rolling if you can't fail on a 1 or succeed on a 20).

For example, no elemental can make the save against Planar Binding if you can get your save DC to 18-20 (depending on the elemental).

[Nhorianscum]

You are missing the spells prepared matter- and strongest options vary from group to group. Plus you can't really fling spells willy-nilly at early levels, and cantrips do rely on casting stat.

A Faerie Fire with a DC of 9 won't get you very far, for example. Or when the magic healing in your group goes from 0 to 7, or when the wizard needs to hit with the Firebolt, etc.

EDIT: The OP's example went as low as a 5 in the casting stat. A wizard would need at least 5 levels before being able to prepare any spell at all beyond the minimum of 1.

The best cantrip in tier 1 is the "crossbow" spell.

Healing in tier 1 is like... grave cleric >>>>>>infinite void>>>>> everything else. At no mod these suckers can 0->full a downed player barb. It's fine. If you want to optimize tier 1 "practical" healing, take grave 1, otherwise you are not optimized for the job.

Faerie fire indeed would be awful. Good thing it's not in the running.

Being restricted to "only" Sleep in tier 1 on a class with minor illusion and "crossbow" is just removing bad options for combat tbh.

[JNAProductions]

The best cantrip in tier 1 is the "crossbow" spell.

Healing in tier 1 is like... grave cleric >>>>>>infinite void>>>>> everything else. At no mod these suckers can 0->full a downed player. It's fine.

Faerie fire indeed would be awful. Good thing it's not in the running.

Being restricted to "only" Sleep in tier 1 on a class with minor illusion and "crossbow" is just removing bad options for combat tbh.

No?

What if you're up against an Ogre at level, say, 3? At 59 HP, he's completely immune to even a 2nd level Sleep, and said Sleep won't impact him on average until he's taken close to 20 points of damage.

Whereas Faerie Fire will increase your martial's DPR by (assuming +5 to-hit) a full 25%, not even accounting for increased crit chance. And when you have only a singular spell prepared... Well, better hope you don't run up against elves. Or literally any type of undead.

[Nhorianscum]

No?

What if you're up against an Ogre at level, say, 3? At 59 HP, he's completely immune to even a 2nd level Sleep, and said Sleep won't impact him on average until he's taken close to 20 points of damage.

Whereas Faerie Fire will increase your martial's DPR by (assuming +5 to-hit) a full 25%, not even accounting for increased crit chance. And when you have only a singular spell prepared... Well, better hope you don't run up against elves. Or literally any type of undead.

Or, hold action sleep till after the barb or rouge shmacks ogre with a reckless/sneaky shlap. Fairy fire on the suuuper low AC ogre is just silly and a wasted slot.

Weird how elves has stupid high saves and use ranged weapons in this range and undead are mindless undead. We're using minor illusion here regardless.

The combination really does just mess with everything in tier 1 really hard. (Edit: There are outliers but those are just dirty encounters that we reaaaally should be using the "dash" spell on regardless of build. Looking at you LMoP flameskull, looking at you.)

(Hi, tier 1 sorc player here. Litterally all we do is spam sleep, crossbow, and minor illusion because that's the only feature that class has before level friggin 7. It's dumb that it works but... it does.)

[JackPhoenix]

At no mod these suckers can 0->full a downed player barb. It's fine.

Unlike Life cleric with positive mod, no, they can't. Ever. Wizard or sorcerer, sure, if they want to spend their action instead of BA, d8 classes, maaaaybe, in the unlikely case they run with no Con bonus, but never anything with d10 or d12 HD.

In fact, your theoretical Grave cleric with Wis 10 can heal for 4 or 8 HP when someone drops to 7. A proper Life cleric with Wis 16 heals for 7-10 or 7-14. Grave cleric is better if he gets better Wis mod AND if the character is at 0. Combat healing is suboptimal use of resources, but there are situations where you can't risk having someone drop to 0.

[Valmark]

The best cantrip in tier 1 is the "crossbow" spell.

Healing in tier 1 is like... grave cleric >>>>>>infinite void>>>>> everything else. At no mod these suckers can 0->full a downed player barb. It's fine. If you want to optimize tier 1 "practical" healing, take grave 1, otherwise you are not optimized for the job.

Faerie fire indeed would be awful. Good thing it's not in the running.

Being restricted to "only" Sleep in tier 1 on a class with minor illusion and "crossbow" is just removing bad options for combat tbh.

It really depends on the cantrip and situation.

Dunno what you mean by 'infinite void' but comparing a single subclass to everything else validates my point- if only that specific subclass doesn't care (and let's remember that even if you take the highest result with a negative modifier you are healing less then you need) then for 95% of the healing classes it is important.

Sleep has the problem that it only really works reliably at low tier 1 with enemies having low enough hp- assuming you don't fight anything immune, like your average zombie.

Faerie Fire makes the party miss far less often, instead. That's bad?

Also, an higher stat will mean you can do both, or take utility spells, etc.

If the OP argued only about known spells casters it would be more reasonable- but universally? No (and even then I'd still disagree).

[Boci]

Or, hold action sleep till after the barb or rouge shmacks ogre with a reckless/sneaky shlap. Fairy fire on the suuuper low AC ogre is just silly and a wasted slot.

Ogres have AC 11. At level 3, assuming point buy non-archery fighters and rogues will have +5 to hit. They have a 25% chance to miss. With fairy fire, that miss chance halves, and they have double the chance to crit. I can see an argument for bless being a better spell against an ogre, since then you won't have to worry about the ogres 35% to pass the save, but bless is a cleric spell.

[Nhorianscum]

Unlike Life cleric with positive mod, no, they can't. Ever. Wizard or sorcerer, sure, if they want to spend their action instead of BA, d8 classes, maaaaybe, in the unlikely case they run with no Con bonus, but never anything with d10 or d12 HD.

In fact, your theoretical Grave cleric with Wis 10 can heal for 4 or 8 HP when someone drops to 7. A proper Life cleric with Wis 16 heals for 7-10 or 7-14. Grave cleric is better if he gets better Wis mod AND if the character is at 0. Combat healing is suboptimal use of resources, but there are situations where you can't risk having someone drop to 0.

Woops, it's genuinely been forever since I cast heal wounds in tier 1 so I thought it was 2d8 base for some reason.

Appologies.

I do stand by grave as the healing baws of early 5e.

--------------

As for the ogre thing. It's just a really bad example for fairy fire. There are a ton of ways to gain natural advantage vs this thing at 3rd level and it's just... not very threatening by default. (My default FR goblinorcanoid "dangerzone" mele baddie for CR 2 are Orog's. Who make a very good comparison point at 3rd level.)

Worth noting that the most dangerous tier 1 encounters are just... lots of low HP dudes. A level appropriate "deadly" encounter with a swarm of advantage granting ankle biters is just... horrifyingly efficent at outright murdering PC's. This may have shaped my outlook on tier 1.

-------------

I guess the argument would be, in tier 1, only considering combat, that we could max out Dex or Str alongside Con (this still leaves room for some invest in casting up to +3 if fully minmaxed so we'll assume it's a weird class/race combo or trash rolls as well, where our mod must be neutral or +1).

This would optimize our "no slot" spells like melemancy and "crossbow" along with HP and AC while keeping our "best" combat spells and cantrips.

Is it bad the moment we hit level 5 and in almost all out of combat situations? Yes. Is it significantly better in combat? Probably.

[Chronos]

Against an ogre, I'm going to want Tasha's Hideous Laughter. Sure, there's a chance it'll fail and I'll waste my spell slot, but it's a small chance, and if I succeed, I've pretty much won the encounter.

Which isn't to say that there aren't a lot of encounters in that level range where Sleep is good. There are. And in one of those encounters, I'm going to use Sleep.

And there are also encounters (usually non-combat ones, but still encounters) where Disguise Self would be just the thing. And likewise for a number of other spells.

But my wizard doesn't know which of those she's going to face, and so she has to be ready for all of them. So she wants to prepare all three (or more) of those spells. Which means that she needs to have at least 14 Int.

[Willie the Duck]

OP is not selling this well, but there is something to think about with the point.

First off, the obvious exception -- it is entirely possible to choose not to focus on your casting stat, and still make most casting classes work. Clerics have all sorts of buffs and heals and such that don't use attack rolls or saves. Wizards can focus on the sleeps/shields/misty steps/magic missiles and so forth. It's easier for them to do that than it is for a (ex.) fighter to forgo str/dex. You can choose to do that, and it (relatively) works out. Just getting that out of the way.

Now, more generally -- while I think the OP is overselling it, there is overselling in the other direction. I have heard people repeat the mantra '<class-specific primary stat> is the thing that influences the roll you make every round, nothing is more important.' That too, is a simplification. If another use of your ASI could radically alter the basic framework with which your character approaches the game, it absolutely can have a greater effect than a +1 to a roll, even if said roll might happen every round. Example: a lore bard (or wizard who chooses hobgoblin) who picks up Moderately Armored does not have to run like a madperson if the opponents overrun the front line. Likewise, War Caster can make the decision to use an concentration-based spell worthwhile, knowing you have a strong likelihood to keep the spell effect up (even at the expense of the save versus that concentration spell being 1 lower). Clerics picking up a SCAGtrip with Magic Initiate might mean that they bother attacking in the upper tiers, where they might otherwise just dodge and let their 'Spirit/ual' spells be their contribution to the fight. Opening up new frontiers can override a +1 per round. It is, however, going to be a niche application.

That said, I wonder if the OP is used to 3e, where casting stats give out other extras (extra spells per day, with each +2 to a stat getting one extra on another spell level higher) and a +1 to the save-vs. has less relative weight (because 3e does not have bounded accuracy, although even in that one a +1 on the save can be a big deal).