Trying to Balance Tier 3-4 Martials vs Casters

[BoutsofInsanity]

That's only true for squishy casters. You can play tanky casters too and they can frontline just as well as the next guy. Why would you pick a Fighter instead of a Cleric or a Moon Druid or a Bladesinger or an tanky Abjurer or a Swords/Valor Bard or whatever? Tanky casters largely have better tools to draw attention and keep enemies from the backline and they have means to make themselves even harder to kill as necessary; i.e. they can adjust to the circumstances. As a bonus, Concentration is a beacon for enemies to hit them which means they draw aggro especially well.

Leaving the white room does of course favour the casters. Encounter setup gives casters a lot of tools since they can interact with the environment to make e.g. areas inaccessible to enemies (very useful if there's limited pathways to a destination) and they have the option to cast a Concentration spell and use terrain obstacles to avoid line of effect (if there's e.g. walls or such available) rendering them entirely immune to reprisal. Whether there's 1 or 10 encounters in a day, it doesn't really matter: I'd rather have tanky frontliner casters or disposable frontliners (á la Zombies or Conjured Animals, which can easily last for multiple encounters with their 1 hour duration) than non-casters (i.e. martials) simply because casters bring their impactful resources in addition to decent non-resource contributions as opposed to martials who bring decent/good non-resource contributions but their resources are less impactful.

Simply put, the number of encounters doesn't meaningfully reduce the value of resources. On the contrary, the longer the days the more resources I want and casters bring the most resources on the table.

I wouldn't really call any encounters that occur within one hour of game time to be multiple encounters. That's literally, just one encounter. You might not be in combat the entire time of that hour. But it's still one encounter.

- Multiple encounters are things like -

Clearing an undead presence out of a mine. Where there are vampires who stalk the mining shafts patrolling to prevent long rests. Where it's also big enough that you can't just easily clear it in an in game 1 hr. Or maybe you can, and you go high speed the whole way through. But maybe some of those vampires hide, and attempt to wait you out, so that when you finally think you are safe, they engage once your buffs drop.

Catching a bandit troupe in the woods. You might have several engagements over the course of several days as you go hex by hex tracking them down. But they also know you are on their trail. So they have their stealthy boys ambush you every time you try to sleep. They might have caster's too, so they are going to try and enable their casters the ability to long rest but prevent you from doing so.


Terrain also benefits the enemy. Especially because the enemy is typically engaging in greater numbers than the party. They have more opportunities to flank and to maneuver the back line over the caster. This only holds true if the encounter is actually dangerous. If the enemies aren't scary enough to require all the parties' attention, it doesn't actually matter.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I wouldn't really call any encounters that occur within one hour of game time to be multiple encounters. That's literally, just one encounter. You might not be in combat the entire time of that hour. But it's still one encounter.

- Multiple encounters are things like -

Clearing an undead presence out of a mine. Where there are vampires who stalk the mining shafts patrolling to prevent long rests. Where it's also big enough that you can't just easily clear it in an in game 1 hr. Or maybe you can, and you go high speed the whole way through. But maybe some of those vampires hide, and attempt to wait you out, so that when you finally think you are safe, they engage once your buffs drop.

Catching a bandit troupe in the woods. You might have several engagements over the course of several days as you go hex by hex tracking them down. But they also know you are on their trail. So they have their stealthy boys ambush you every time you try to sleep. They might have caster's too, so they are going to try and enable their casters the ability to long rest but prevent you from doing so.


Terrain also benefits the enemy. Especially because the enemy is typically engaging in greater numbers than the party. They have more opportunities to flank and to maneuver the back line over the caster. This only holds true if the encounter is actually dangerous. If the enemies aren't scary enough to require all the parties' attention, it doesn't actually matter.

Heck, or just archers. I find that creatures with ranged attacks punch way above their nominal damage ratings because they can switch targets pretty easy and a lot of the heaviest-hitting PCs can't reach them. Even CR 3 Archers are scary way longer than they'd be if they were just brutes. And pack a group of Quaddrones (CR 1) into a room with enough room for them to spread out and watch the casters melt. I once ran an encounter (at level 8 or so, but the party was decked out) against a couple CR 5 brutes and 10 quad drones. 40 arrows a round was scary.

[Eldariel]

No amount of False Life is going to cover the nearly double HP fighters

16 Con Fighter vs. 16 Con Wizard isn't really that big. 45% on level 1, 29% on level 20: single False Life from max level will give the Wizard more HP in all cases. 1d4+4 averages 6,5 where Fighter has 4 more and there's 2 points of difference on each level whereas upcast False Life always gets +5 so on level 3, it's 11,5 vs. 6 and on level 5, 16,5 vs. 10, etc. It's actually quite close to what the Fighter has even counting Second Wind. And that's assuming the Wizard's Shield and Absorb Elements literally prevent zero damage over the day.

I wouldn't really call any encounters that occur within one hour of game time to be multiple encounters. That's literally, just one encounter. You might not be in combat the entire time of that hour. But it's still one encounter.

- Multiple encounters are things like -

Clearing an undead presence out of a mine. Where there are vampires who stalk the mining shafts patrolling to prevent long rests. Where it's also big enough that you can't just easily clear it in an in game 1 hr. Or maybe you can, and you go high speed the whole way through. But maybe some of those vampires hide, and attempt to wait you out, so that when you finally think you are safe, they engage once your buffs drop.

Catching a bandit troupe in the woods. You might have several engagements over the course of several days as you go hex by hex tracking them down. But they also know you are on their trail. So they have their stealthy boys ambush you every time you try to sleep. They might have caster's too, so they are going to try and enable their casters the ability to long rest but prevent you from doing so.


Terrain also benefits the enemy. Especially because the enemy is typically engaging in greater numbers than the party. They have more opportunities to flank and to maneuver the back line over the caster. This only holds true if the encounter is actually dangerous. If the enemies aren't scary enough to require all the parties' attention, it doesn't actually matter.

Oh sure, but encounter spacing depends on the scenario. Not every place has incorporeal or burrowing enemies able to harass you at will. Even if they do though, Animate Dead lasts 24 hours so it has no downtime. And Conjure Animals can be cast 3 times on level 6 and there's plenty in the Druid tank even without it; it's just what the Druid has to essentially godmode through a couple of tough encounters.

[Dork_Forge]

Spoiler: Lightning Arrow vs. Fireball

Show

I don't underestimate AOEs, I just find it stupid that a tier 3 subclass specific only real martial AOE in the game still loses out to a tier 2 Wizard/Sorc (& various subclasses) AOE. Like casters being better is fine but casters being so much better that an ability coming an entire tier later with maximal investment is still inferior? Eh, I dunno about that.

As for Lightning Arrow, it's fine but like, it's class specific Tier 3 ability. It's also Concentration. It costs you two actions. You probably only have 16 Wis at best so the save DC is subpar (DC15 on 11 instead of DC17 on generic Wizard). And for all that, it's still not as good as Fireball. Like, cast it in AOE including just a ****load of some generic Tier 3 meatbag, say Redcaps (AC 13, 45 HP, no special resistances) on level 11.

	L11 Lightning Arrow Hunter with SS/Arch + Longbow	L11 Wizard
Primary target	6d8 & save ½ vs. +1 Dex (avg. 22,275) + 19,5 at +6 vs. AC13 (13,875) = 36,15 [average 2 hits to drop]	8d6 vs. +1 Dex (avg. 24,5) [average 2 hits to drop]
Other targets	2d8 & save ½ vs. +1 Dex (avg. 7,425) + 19,5 at +6 vs. AC13 (13,875) = 21,3 [average 3 hits to drop]	8d6 vs. +1 Dex (avg. 24,5) [average 2 hits to drop]
Resources expended	1/3 level 3+ slots = 33,3% of slots plus Concentration	1/11 level 3+ slots [2 from Arcane Recovery] = 9,1% [6 of which are more powerful]
Radius	10'	20' (spreads around corners)
Range	600'	150

Number of targets needed for Wizard to come out ahead:
24,5x > 21,3(x-1)+36,15
24,5x - 21,3x > 36,15 - 21,3
3,2x > 14,85 || :3,2
x > 4,640625

So if you're hitting 5+ targets with both, Fireball comes out ahead. Or if there's a single target you can hit with Fireball but not Volley + Lightning Arrow (by going around corners or by having twice bigger AOE) we unsurprisingly end up with:
24,5x > 21,3(x-2)+36,15
24,5x - 21,3x > 36,15 - 42,6
3,2x > -11,45 || :3,2
x > -3,578125

Or with the Fireball user coming out ahead for any number of targets (which is, of course, trivial: 24,5*2 = 49 > 36,15). In other words, Lightning Arrow could afford to be a lot better given it comes on level 9 whereas Fireball comes on level 5 and LA is completely exclusive to Ranger (outside Lore Bards). The only advantage LA has is range, which is nice but again mostly relevant in an army situation (in a normal adventuring situation, extreme ranges require unusual terrain).

If Lightning Arrow didn't require Concentration (which is pretty big given Ranger list has spells like Conjure Animals, Spike Growth, Pass without Trace, Hunter's Mark, etc.) and if it did a bit more damage in the AOE, it'd be pretty good but as it stands, it just leaves a lot to be desired (it felt like the designers were overcautious in designing it in spite of all its limitations). I rarely find it worth one of your few level 3 slots and last Ranger I played didn't even bother learning it [since your spells known are pretty sparse and 2d8 is sorry for an AOE].

I may be misreading it, but your Lighning Arrow section looks completely wrong. The primary target is a weapon attack, there is no save for half and you Wus doesn't enter into it. Since it is a weapon attack, you should be adding Archery to the to hit and Dex mod to the damage with the option of adding Sharpshooter +10 to the damage (and since you chose an AC13 creature, yeah you should be adding it).

I may have missed it but didn't see you mention that Fire is one of the worse spell damage types and Fireball a purposeful overtuned spell.

HP matters but HP of Wizards is ~70% of that of the Fighters. At most one more attack. It isn't enough for a meaningful division. Abjurer has same or more EHP as an equivalent Fighter and any Wizard can cast max level False Life once to totally destroy the difference. This isn't at all a weakness of the casters. On the contrary; if you want, your casters are going to be way harder to kill than any Fighter short of Eldritch Knight (who is, surprise surprise, a caster). Because Shield and Absorb Elements are bonkers spells and because there's nothing stopping casters from wearing shields and armor if they get the proficiency (from race, feats, subclass, dip, anywhere).

No, Abjurer's Ward is not the same as a Fighter's HP at all that assumes a Wizard + Subclass +equal Con vs a blank Fighter chassis. When in reality:

There's no reason for the Fighter to have the same Con.

This doesn't account for Second Wind.

This doesn't account for other methods of healing (short rest, potions, healing spells) that capitalise on the higher hp max over the day.

A higher actual hp max also means that you have a higher threshold for insta-death, and more resistant to total hp effects (the ward won't help you against max hp reduction effects, which can very well kill you pretty quickly, or Power Word Kill etc.)

This doesn't account for any subclass relevant abilities (say the temp hp from Fighting Spirit, the Psi Warrior's damage reduction etc.)

False Life: How exactly is any Wizard maximising False Life? Are they burning spell slots until it happens? Hoping they roll max first time? And whilst this can happen and False Life is a spell I'm fond of, I don't think I've ever seen it on the Wizard side of arguments before, so how likely do you think it is you'd actually have a Wizard prepare it (or even learn it) rather than pull out whatever spell is relevant to a discussion? It is bordering on Shrodingers Wizard territory.

[PhoenixPhyre]

False Life: How exactly is any Wizard maximising False Life? Are they burning spell slots until it happens? Hoping they roll max first time? And whilst this can happen and False Life is a spell I'm fond of, I don't think I've ever seen it on the Wizard side of arguments before, so how likely do you think it is you'd actually have a Wizard prepare it (or even learn it) rather than pull out whatever spell is relevant to a discussion? It is bordering on Shrodingers Wizard territory.

As do 99.999% of all caster vs martial "debates" on these forums. They always assume that the caster is built exactly for that one situation and can effortlessly rebuild for any threat on the fly, while the martial is hobbled under silly assumptions.

In real play, I've not run into these issues at all.

[BoutsofInsanity]

As do 99.999% of all caster vs martial "debates" on these forums. They always assume that the caster is built exactly for that one situation and can effortlessly rebuild for any threat on the fly, while the martial is hobbled under silly assumptions.

In real play, I've not run into these issues at all.

See i've ran into the same thing. More often then not the Wizard is scrambling to solve a problem and borderline panicking trying to survive or pull something out their butt for the fight. Like, it's not like if the Fighter get's Force Caged the Wizard isn't freaking out. More often then not, the Wizard is desperately trying to get the fighter out of the bubble so that the fighter can go cause all the necessary problems needed to prevent the Wizard from exploding instantly.

[Xervous]

See i've ran into the same thing. More often then not the Wizard is scrambling to solve a problem and borderline panicking trying to survive or pull something out their butt for the fight. Like, it's not like if the Fighter get's Force Caged the Wizard isn't freaking out. More often then not, the Wizard is desperately trying to get the fighter out of the bubble so that the fighter can go cause all the necessary problems needed to prevent the Wizard from exploding instantly.

Out of curiosity what happens if there’s no wizard and the fighter wins the all expenses paid trip to forcecage seclusion?

[Dork_Forge]

Out of curiosity what happens if there’s no wizard and the fighter wins the all expenses paid trip to forcecage seclusion?

If there is no one to help a PC out of Force Cage and that PC cannot escape on their own, then the party is at a significant disadvantage that can lead to a TPK.

[BoutsofInsanity]

Out of curiosity what happens if there’s no wizard and the fighter wins the all expenses paid trip to forcecage seclusion?

I would hope that in such a scenario, the DM isn't be a buttmuch and just trying to sideline a character. But in that case, party might lose.

To be clear, in any example I'm using, it's under the assumption that the DM is attempting to be fair, and present a challenging but fun story and isn't trying to bring the fun times to a halt.

[Asisreo1]

Out of curiosity what happens if there’s no wizard and the fighter wins the all expenses paid trip to forcecage seclusion?

The other martials do multiple attacks to threaten concentration on the BBEG.

I mean, there are 0 monsters with the innate ability to use Forcecage but lets assume a changed spell list.

Monks can break it if they land a stun. Paladins and Rangers can probably do enough damage to make one hard concentration save. Rogues could too with a sneak attack.

Barbarians and Fighters could either use their features to increase number of attacks or damage output to kill off the spell.

In essence, teamwork.

Edit: Right, wrong spell. I was definitely thinking Wall of Force.

It would be a tight situation indeed.

Although, Forcecage is one of those "Suspicious that this BBEG has it against this party" Type. Like if a BBEG has Antimagic Field and Counterspell suspiciously in his spell list against an all caster team and, oh look, he just so happens to be in a small room with a mob of nonmagical minions at his disposal. Almost like he was countering the group on purpose.

Honestly, it can make sense for a BBEG to want to directly counter high-level adventurers with a trap. But you can't help but feel like things have gotten shifty.

[Eldariel]

No, Abjurer's Ward is not the same as a Fighter's HP at all that assumes a Wizard + Subclass +equal Con vs a blank Fighter chassis. When in reality:

There's no reason for the Fighter to have the same Con.

Fighter has better things to be spending their ASIs on generally. At least I've yet to see a single Fighter build raising their Con with their first 6 ASIs. Fact is, both will probably have the Con they got at character creation, no more, so it's probably 16 each if they're optimising (unless the Fighter is specifically Mountain Dwarf; but of course, e.g. Hobgoblin Wizard is looking at 18 too).

EDIT: Quick listing of what I'd take before going for HP improvements:
+4 primary attack stat
PAM + GWM or SS + XBE or Shield Master + PAM [the fighting style feats]
EA (if available)
Res: Wis [this is 6 already unless we have only 1 fighting style feat as with Longbow or 0 as with Shadow Blade EK]
Lucky
Alert
Crusher/Piercer/etc. is arguable but potentially worth considering


And that's just thinking about core competence, let alone branching out with Ritual Caster or Skill Expert or some such. I seriously doubt Fighters can fit in +2 Con or Tough any time soon.

This doesn't account for Second Wind.

Ward is regenerated each time you cast Shield/Absorb Elements/Counterspell/etc. It adds up to a substantial amount over the day if you're fighting a lot. You can also regenerate it with either out-of-combat Alarms (if you don't need Arcane Recovery and the party is short resting, you can just regenerate 12 Ward HP by ritualising Alarm 6 times) or, if you have Armor of Shadows or Svirfneblin Magic, at will between encounters meaning you'll have more than 1/SR access to it (the more fights, the better).

This doesn't account for other methods of healing (short rest, potions, healing spells) that capitalise on the higher hp max over the day.

Of those exactly only Short Rest actually cares about your HP total.

A higher actual hp max also means that you have a higher threshold for insta-death, and more resistant to total hp effects (the ward won't help you against max hp reduction effects, which can very well kill you pretty quickly, or Power Word Kill etc.)

Cornercases but of course something to keep in mind. I've DMd for an Abjurer 1-10 and so far it's yet to matter.

This doesn't account for any subclass relevant abilities (say the temp hp from Fighting Spirit, the Psi Warrior's damage reduction etc.)

True. But that's kinda whatever; we're talking peanuts by that point.

False Life: How exactly is any Wizard maximising False Life? Are they burning spell slots until it happens? Hoping they roll max first time? And whilst this can happen and False Life is a spell I'm fond of, I don't think I've ever seen it on the Wizard side of arguments before, so how likely do you think it is you'd actually have a Wizard prepare it (or even learn it) rather than pull out whatever spell is relevant to a discussion? It is bordering on Shrodingers Wizard territory.

Max roll is pretty irrelevant; you need a 2 on d4 for level 1 False Life to match what the two levels of Fighter give. It's not a commonly prepared spell, which is precisely my point: an option that Wizards don't even use (like, it's not worth it, their abilities give better stuff), would put any Wizard on equal footing with a Fighter. That's how little people care about the bonus HP options. Though granted, in some cases False Life isn't bad (of course, Armor of Agathys is generally better) but I generally wouldn't bother casting it simply because spells are just that good. But if I was making a Wizard who's pretending to be a Fighter, it's there in case I happened to need some extra HP.

[Dork_Forge]

Fighter has better things to be spending their ASIs on generally. At least I've yet to see a single Fighter build raising their Con with their first 6 ASIs. Fact is, both will probably have the Con they got at character creation, no more, so it's probably 16 each if they're optimising (unless the Fighter is specifically Mountain Dwarf; but of course, e.g. Hobgoblin Wizard is looking at 18 too).

That's a heavily Wizard biased assumption. I've DM'd for quite a few Wizards, none of them have started at Con 16 and I've seen all kinds of classes raise their Con. This doesn't even take into consideration that there's more races that a Fighter would choose that give Con bumps compared to a Wizard (assuming no Tasha's optional moving of stats).

A Fighter doesn't even need to raise Con to get more hp, if they aren't concentrating then they can just take Tough.

Even a Hobgoblin Wizard is only getting the stats you're assuming if they're dumping basically everything else. 3 dumped stats leads to a pretty vulnverable character in a lot of ways with a whole raft of skills they're terrible at.

You have no reason to assume both a Fighter and a Wizard would start with 16 Con, like you can't assume any old Wizard will start with 16 Con either, that's very specific race and stats choices and you can very well optimise without making said choices.


Edit: Just saw your edit so:

EDIT: Quick listing of what I'd take before going for HP improvements:
+4 primary attack stat
PAM + GWM or SS + XBE or Shield Master + PAM [the fighting style feats]
EA (if available)
Res: Wis [this is 6 already unless we have only 1 fighting style feat as with Longbow or 0 as with Shadow Blade EK]
Lucky
Alert
Crusher/Piercer/etc. is arguable but potentially worth considering


And that's just thinking about core competence, let alone branching out with Ritual Caster or Skill Expert or some such. I seriously doubt Fighters can fit in +2 Con or Tough any time soon.

You have a very warped perception of core competency, you don't need any of those feats to be competent at what you do. You don't need any feats at all to be competent. It seems that your view of play is heavily coloured by high end optimisation talk on the boards, Fighers don't need any of that to do well.

Ward is regenerated each time you cast Shield/Absorb Elements/Counterspell/etc. It adds up to a substantial amount over the day if you're fighting a lot. You can also regenerate it with either out-of-combat Alarms (if you don't need Arcane Recovery and the party is short resting, you can just regenerate 12 Ward HP by ritualising Alarm 6 times) or, if you have Armor of Shadows or Svirfneblin Magic, at will between encounters meaning you'll have more than 1/SR access to it (the more fights, the better).

Second Wind is a short rest resource, it adds up over the day. Note that if you're casting False Life, like you proposed (you don't get to talk about different spells and tactics in isolation, it leads to nothing but Schrodingers superior Wizard, which is not the reality). Likewise if you get hit and Shield wouldn't help you or you take a damage type that Absorb Elements doesn't cover, you don't get anything to Counterspell etc.

You certainly can spam rituals and what not, which is entirely gamist and I've yet to see anyone actually take that route (and as a DM I certainly wouldn't let that fly without a good reason).

Of those exactly only Short Rest actually cares about your HP total.

All healing cares about your max hp total. Nobody but the the Wizard (casting Abjuration) can recharge the ward. Anyone, doing a variety of things can restore the Fighters larger pool of hp.

Cornercases but of course something to keep in mind. I've DMd for an Abjurer 1-10 and so far it's yet to matter.

No not cornercases, instadeath is a very real threat for everyone in early game and for the Wizard (and most Sorcerers) the longest. HP reduction also isn't something to be so ignored.

True. But that's kinda whatever; we're talking peanuts by that point.

What? Even at it's base form, Fighting Spirit is 15 temp hp a day, how is that peanuts? The Psi Warrior's reduction isn't peanuts either.

You just seem to be writing off factors that show a more accurate comparison, whilst claiming that the ward regen from Shield etc. is significant.

That doesn't exactly scream fair and open comparison.

Max roll is pretty irrelevant; you need a 2 on d4 for level 1 False Life to match what the two levels of Fighter give. It's not a commonly prepared spell, which is precisely my point: an option that Wizards don't even use (like, it's not worth it, their abilities give better stuff), would put any Wizard on equal footing with a Fighter. That's how little people care about the bonus HP options. Though granted, in some cases False Life isn't bad (of course, Armor of Agathys is generally better) but I generally wouldn't bother casting it simply because spells are just that good. But if I was making a Wizard who's pretending to be a Fighter, it's there in case I happened to need some extra HP.

What? You're the one that said maximised, that's why I questioned it.

Armor of Agathys is a worse souce of temp hp, False Life is a good spell for what it is, though I imagine compensating for the natural short ocmings of a Wizard is a little unglamourous and I suspect a lot of the time that is why it isn't taken.

A Wizard has to heavily invest in basically every single area they can to achieve durability that is part and parcel to a Fighter, that is by design. You using edge cases (Hobgoblin Abjurers with a horrific stat line) gives you a Wizard that is more durable, but doesn't stand up to a Fighter actually investing in their defences or even a Fighter subclass that comes with defensive options.

Instead it's just how great spells are, when you're having to burn spells and slots on just breaking even.

Wizards just aren't durable by design and that's okay, they don't have to be (and shouldn't) be good at everything.

[Eldariel]

What? You're the one that said maximised, that's why I questioned it.

Max as in max level. Level 1 when you can cast level 1 spells, level 2 when you can cast level 2 spells, etc.

Armor of Agathys is a worse souce of temp hp, False Life is a good spell for what it is, though I imagine compensating for the natural short ocmings of a Wizard is a little unglamourous and I suspect a lot of the time that is why it isn't taken.

A Wizard has to heavily invest in basically every single area they can to achieve durability that is part and parcel to a Fighter, that is by design. You using edge cases (Hobgoblin Abjurers with a horrific stat line) gives you a Wizard that is more durable, but doesn't stand up to a Fighter actually investing in their defences or even a Fighter subclass that comes with defensive options.

Instead it's just how great spells are, when you're having to burn spells and slots on just breaking even.

Wizards just aren't durable by design and that's okay, they don't have to be (and shouldn't) be good at everything.

Just repeating that doesn't make it true. Your own post is basically just "I haven't seen it happen, therefore it doesn't happen". Try playing a tanky frontline Wizard (Abjurer since that's where the disagreements seem to occur), preferably in a party with a Fighter, do your best to actually make it work, and see what happens. This kind of theoretical discussion will obviously never convince you but personal experience might.


And Hobgoblin Wizard with 13-14 Dex/17 Con/16 Int going with Moderately Armored and Res: Con is far from horrible. It's actually a really solid build that gets to have superb durability (19 base AC starting on level 4 with access to all the Wizard defensive spells, and Abjurer's Ward as extra HP on top of having 18 Con on level 8). It works with Githyanki, Mountain Dwarf, etc. too (especially now with Tasha's). Basically any race that gets Light Armor Proficiency. Having base 19 AC that in no way affects your capabilities as a caster is pretty sweet and makes Shield all the better (24 AC with Shield means most mooks are critfishing if they're trying to focus you down), and +3-+4 Con is nice for Concentration and HP which combined with Abjurer's Ward makes you just plain hard to damage and then you have Absorb Elements for all elemental damage (Mountain Dwarf with Tasha's reassignments is of course even better with poison resistance and 17 Int and such).

[Dork_Forge]

Max as in max level. Level 1 when you can cast level 1 spells, level 2 when you can cast level 2 spells, etc.

So part of your argument is using your highest level resource to compensate?

Just repeating that doesn't make it true. Your own post is basically just "I haven't seen it happen, therefore it doesn't happen". Try playing a tanky frontline Wizard (Abjurer since that's where the disagreements seem to occur), preferably in a party with a Fighter, do your best to actually make it work, and see what happens. This kind of theoretical discussion will obviously never convince you but personal experience might.

No my post is pointing out that you're pointing to an edge example and not doing the Fighter the justice of giving them what they'd actually have.

I have no desire to play a selfish Abjurer (these discussions usually assume that the level 6 ability is never used), I'd rather play a War Wizard or Bladesinger personally. I have DM'd a Fighter 1/Abjurer 7 with I think either a 14 or 16 Con. He was very very sure of himself and his defenses. The party fled the encounter after he couldn't withstand what was going on (he wasn't the shining pinacle of choices, but he was playing a popular version of what you're suggesting).

And Hobgoblin Wizard with 13-14 Dex/17 Con/16 Int going with Moderately Armored and Res: Con is far from horrible. It's actually a really solid build that gets to have superb durability (19 base AC starting on level 4 with access to all the Wizard defensive spells, and Abjurer's Ward as extra HP on top of having 18 Con on level 8). It works with Githyanki, Mountain Dwarf, etc. too (especially now with Tasha's). Basically any race that gets Light Armor Proficiency. Having base 19 AC that in no way affects your capabilities as a caster is pretty sweet and makes Shield all the better (24 AC with Shield means most mooks are critfishing if they're trying to focus you down), and +3-+4 Con is nice for Concentration and HP which combined with Abjurer's Ward makes you just plain hard to damage and then you have Absorb Elements for all elemental damage (Mountain Dwarf with Tasha's reassignments is of course even better with poison resistance and 17 Int and such).

I never said the build was horrible, I said the statline was, because it is. Ending up with two 8s and a 10 (or three 8s depending on the exact choices) is a terrible statline. I honestly have no idea how doing this doesn't impact casting either, since you'll end up with a 16 Int until 12th level. You're a worse Wizard than a normal Wizard build is because you prepare less spells, they're less effective and your Ward isn't even reaching its potential.

There also seems to be an assumption here that Dex saves (or saves in general) will be elemental? Traps, necrotic etc. there's still plenty of ways to hurt that Wizard. This is a build that makes great sacrifices for durability (yes at the expense of your casting potential) to (in this discussion) compete with an average Fighter.

Your comparisons also seem to skip over the early levels. Earlier upthread you just didn't reply when I asked how a Wizard was even affording to use a Light Crossbow and Find Familiar at first level. Now you're pointing to a build that doesn't get it's lauded AC until 4th level.

So how does your Wizard compare against any old Fighter at 1st level?

Or at 4th?

Let's even do a comparison at 8th shall we. Please correct if my numbers for your propsed Wizard are wrong).

Wizard (Hobgoblin): AC 19 (assuming Half Plate and Shield) HP 66 Ward 19

Fighter (Goliath Samurai 17 12 16 8 13 8, ASIs- Slasher [Str], Tough, +2 Con):
AC 20 (Plate and Shield, Fighter Win) HP 100 (Fighter win) Stone's Endurance 10.5 avg Second Wind 13.5 Temp hp 5

So the Fighter has a higher resting AC and if you add together the Wizards hp and Ward the Fighter comes out ahead by +15hp before you take anything else into consideration. Assuming no short rest and a single use of Fighting Spirit, then the total goes up to +44hp difference. Every short rest the Fighter will come out with Second Wind and Stone's Endurance ready to go as well as max hp (unless for some reason only they run out of hit die). I'm not seeing the Wizard be more durable here, in fact they'll need to burn slots on defensive spells to hit parity.

Oh if it comes up they're also resistant to Cold.

Now I made some defensive choices in that build, but I didn't gimp the Fighter doing so, they still have a +4 Str, Dueling and a feat that feeds into the natural crit fishing of a Samurai. I could push it further, more Con (more hp and more from SE), Defensive Duelist and so on, the Fighter at this point still has plenty of ASIs going forward.

[Eldariel]

I have no desire to play a selfish Abjurer (these discussions usually assume that the level 6 ability is never used), I'd rather play a War Wizard or Bladesinger personally. I have DM'd a Fighter 1/Abjurer 7 with I think either a 14 or 16 Con. He was very very sure of himself and his defenses. The party fled the encounter after he couldn't withstand what was going on (he wasn't the shining pinacle of choices, but he was playing a popular version of what you're suggesting).

Bleh, really? Obviously the level 6 ability is less useful here since this build specifically uses it personally. And this particular story...doesn't really say anything except poorly played build will fail regardless of how good the build. It's totally possible to get yourself or your party killed playing a Totem Warrior Barbarian, even.

I never said the build was horrible, I said the statline was, because it is. Ending up with two 8s and a 10 (or three 8s depending on the exact choices) is a terrible statline. I honestly have no idea how doing this doesn't impact casting either, since you'll end up with a 16 Int until 12th level. You're a worse Wizard than a normal Wizard build is because you prepare less spells, they're less effective and your Ward isn't even reaching its potential.

The difference isn't that big. Yes, you're missing 1-2 HP from the Ward but that's pretty elementary. You still get pretty nice HP and luckily Wizard spells are good enough that you can make do with 16 Int just fine.

There also seems to be an assumption here that Dex saves (or saves in general) will be elemental? Traps, necrotic etc. there's still plenty of ways to hurt that Wizard. This is a build that makes great sacrifices for durability (yes at the expense of your casting potential) to (in this discussion) compete with an average Fighter.

*shrug* How is that different from a Fighter? They don't have Dex save proficiency either and probably won't have more than 14 Dex.

Your comparisons also seem to skip over the early levels. Earlier upthread you just didn't reply when I asked how a Wizard was even affording to use a Light Crossbow and Find Familiar at first level. Now you're pointing to a build that doesn't get it's lauded AC until 4th level.

Uh, you can take like Criminal starting package, sell your Sage's pack and like a Crowbar and get the 36 gold you need for L. Crossbow + Arrows + Familiar. As soon as you literally get any loot that'll cease to be an issue.

So how does your Wizard compare against any old Fighter at 1st level?

*shrug* Depends on how you play it. Certainly much less HP. But it's kinda pointless; you can't really tank on level 1 anyways. Nobody save perhaps raging Barb can afford to plan to take damage on this level: it's way too volatile. Scouting + stealth + strong, reliable alpha strike is the only way to get reasonable survival odds on level 1 - so whether you play a Fighter or a Wizard, you really shouldn't plan on taking hits.

Or at 4th?

Let's even do a comparison at 8th shall we. Please correct if my numbers for your propsed Wizard are wrong).

Wizard (Hobgoblin): AC 19 (assuming Half Plate and Shield) HP 66 Ward 19

Fighter (Goliath Samurai 17 12 16 8 13 8, ASIs- Slasher [Str], Tough, +2 Con):
AC 20 (Plate and Shield, Fighter Win) HP 100 (Fighter win) Stone's Endurance 10.5 avg Second Wind 13.5 Temp hp 5

So the Fighter has a higher resting AC and if you add together the Wizards hp and Ward the Fighter comes out ahead by +15hp before you take anything else into consideration. Assuming no short rest and a single use of Fighting Spirit, then the total goes up to +44hp difference. Every short rest the Fighter will come out with Second Wind and Stone's Endurance ready to go as well as max hp (unless for some reason only they run out of hit die). I'm not seeing the Wizard be more durable here, in fact they'll need to burn slots on defensive spells to hit parity.

Oh if it comes up they're also resistant to Cold.

Now I made some defensive choices in that build, but I didn't gimp the Fighter doing so, they still have a +4 Str, Dueling and a feat that feeds into the natural crit fishing of a Samurai. I could push it further, more Con (more hp and more from SE), Defensive Duelist and so on, the Fighter at this point still has plenty of ASIs going forward.

So Wizard is resistant to Cold, Fire, Lightning, Acid or Thunder. Fighter has resistance to Cold. Wizard has 24 AC when needed. Fighter has 20. So Wizard comes out pretty far ahead on those numbers. Fighter has a bit more HP but will obviously lose it more rapidly since he lacks resistances and AC or any reactions of note. Wizard also has Counterspell which is a rather big survivability bump over not having it vs. casters. And he has Polymorph, of course, if he wants to give anyone 157 temporary HP, which alone gives them more EHP provided than the Fighter.

[JoeJ]

Max as in max level. Level 1 when you can cast level 1 spells, level 2 when you can cast level 2 spells, etc.

Really? Your wizard thinks, "what should I use my only 9th level slot on today? What's most likely to be useful? Wish? True Polymorph? Foresight? Time Stop? Nah, I think I'll go with False Life."

[Dork_Forge]

Bleh, really? Obviously the level 6 ability is less useful here since this build specifically uses it personally. And this particular story...doesn't really say anything except poorly played build will fail regardless of how good the build. It's totally possible to get yourself or your party killed playing a Totem Warrior Barbarian, even.

My point is that most of the time Abjurer is brought up, the level 6 ability is entirely ignored. That's dead weight that other Schools wouldn't really suffer from in optimised builds.

Yes he made poor choices, it also highlights that the defense of a higher AC Abjurer isn't enough without heavy reinforcement and tactical play.

The difference isn't that big. Yes, you're missing 1-2 HP from the Ward but that's pretty elementary. You still get pretty nice HP and luckily Wizard spells are good enough that you can make do with 16 Int just fine.

You're just handwaving any issues. The two hp from the ward are the least of your worries, your whole thing as a Wizard is the large amount of spells you have access to. This build gives you less to prepare (when you have to have Shield, Absorb Elements and Counter Spell prepared as defenses so far by what you've said) and you're limited to buffs and none save based control spells.

No matter how you slice it, a Wizard that gets two feats and leaves their Int at 16 will be a worse off Wizard than the one that maxes their Int. Lower to hit, lower save DC, less spells, lower ward, worse Arcana.

*shrug* How is that different from a Fighter? They don't have Dex save proficiency either and probably won't have more than 14 Dex.

I never said anything about the Fighter, I'm pointing out that Absorb Elements doesn't automatically cover you from save based damage.

That's also a weird generalisation to make, Dex fighters are certainly a thing and very potent.

Uh, you can take like Criminal starting package, sell your Sage's pack and like a Crowbar and get the 36 gold you need for L. Crossbow + Arrows + Familiar. As soon as you literally get any loot that'll cease to be an issue.

So now you're an adventurer that doesn't even have a backpack to carry your supplies in? Or are we meant to ignore the practical side of long distance hiking, camping and dungeoneering? By the way Wizards don't start off with armor either so...

*shrug* Depends on how you play it. Certainly much less HP. But it's kinda pointless; you can't really tank on level 1 anyways. Nobody save perhaps raging Barb can afford to plan to take damage on this level: it's way too volatile. Scouting + stealth + strong, reliable alpha strike is the only way to get reasonable survival odds on level 1 - so whether you play a Fighter or a Wizard, you really shouldn't plan on taking hits.

So it compares like any other Wizard.

So Wizard is resistant to Cold, Fire, Lightning, Acid or Thunder.

No, they don't. They can gain resistance against one of those types by spending a reaction, spell slot and after having already invested a prepared spell. If you don't have any of those things available to you (or choose to not use them in case you need it later on) then you don't have diddly.

Fighter has resistance to Cold. Wizard has 24 AC when needed.

Same as above, having access to Shield is not automatically having an 24AC. If you are hit by something that denies your reaction? If you've already Counterspelled or used Absorb Elements?

So Wizard comes out pretty far ahead on those numbers.

The Wizard can burn resources to compensate, the Wizard's resources are not infinite or even particularly plentiful at this point.

The resistance thing doesn't even 'come out ahead' since resistance just goes towards closing the gap on hp.

Fighter has a bit more HP but will obviously lose it more rapidly since he lacks resistances and AC or any reactions of note. Wizard also has Counterspell which is a rather big survivability bump over not having it vs. casters. And he has Polymorph, of course, if he wants to give anyone 157 temporary HP, which alone gives them more EHP provided than the Fighter.

15hp difference when you account for the Wizard's HP+Ward is a bit? This is before you factor in any actual abilities the Fighter has...

So you chose to ignore the Second Wind, Stone's Endurance and Fighting Spirit numbers I provided and instead brought out more spells to argue your case. The Wizard will get 4 spell levels back on a single short rest, which might keep up with resourcce burning on the defenses... maybe. The Fighter gets quite a bit back on their short rest including their HP advantage.

Counterspell is great... assuming that you're fighting a spellcaster within 60ft of you, whilst you have your reaction (not like you've been relying on reaction spells for the rest of your argument... right?) and a 3rd level or higher slot (neither cheap, nor plentiful).

All of this cost to just up your defenses... And what do you have left to actually do something? You're assuming slots for your defenses so you must be conservative... Your Int is lacking so you neither have the breadth of options or the bonuses to rely on.

Oh yeah, you can become a T Rex! Completely invalidating everything else you've been talking about and making you a dumb animal relying on making Con saves as you wade into battle. Wait, weren't we assuming the Casters were going to be a prevalent threat when you were talking about defenses? So... Dispel Magic and then you're in melee and presumably without Ward or much hp.

You aren't making a convincing argument, nor am I sure why you're so adamant that the Wizard must be able to be more durable than a Fighter (when it's not achieving that against a Fighter that somewhat invests in durability).

[Eldariel]

You aren't making a convincing argument, nor am I sure why you're so adamant that the Wizard must be able to be more durable than a Fighter (when it's not achieving that against a Fighter that somewhat invests in durability).

So...what exactly did we accomplish here? I showed you that a Wizard can be plenty durable for any frontlining duties, you go "but Fighter gets more!", and then I present the option of just turning anyone in the party into a 157 HP frontline in addition to everything you're providing personally and you say that doesn't count. If we can't even agree on Wizards being at least as tanky as Fighters when desired, we're never going anywhere. So...thanks, I'm gonna stop wasting my time.

Really? Your wizard thinks, "what should I use my only 9th level slot on today? What's most likely to be useful? Wish? True Polymorph? Foresight? Time Stop? Nah, I think I'll go with False Life."

Of course not, my point was that you could do that if you really wanted to make up for the HP difference. Honestly, the highest level slot you'd probably ever use is level 5 but that's enough to make up for the difference on the first 11 levels. But the whole point about False Life is that if people rather cast other spells than False Life rather than just getting that bundle of extra HP, then the HP differential is obviously not very important.

[Dork_Forge]

So...what exactly did we accomplish here? I showed you that a Wizard can be plenty durable for any frontlining duties, you go "but Fighter gets more!", and then I present the option of just turning anyone in the party into a 157 HP frontline in addition to everything you're providing personally and you say that doesn't count. If we can't even agree on Wizards being at least as tanky as Fighters when desired, we're never going anywhere. So...thanks, I'm gonna stop wasting my time.

What? This whole disagreement has been becuase I disagree that a Wizard can be as tanky as a Fighter unless it's a very wonky comparison.

Of course not, my point was that you could do that if you really wanted to make up for the HP difference. Honestly, the highest level slot you'd probably ever use is level 5 but that's enough to make up for the difference on the first 11 levels. But the whole point about False Life is that if people rather cast other spells than False Life rather than just getting that bundle of extra HP, then the HP differential is obviously not very important.

An hour of temp hp consuming your highest level resource =/= a higher hp maximum.

[Asisreo1]

Fighter has better things to be spending their ASIs on generally. At least I've yet to see a single Fighter build raising their Con with their first 6 ASIs. Fact is, both will probably have the Con they got at character creation, no more,

I dunno, this is a hard disagree for me.

After you get your primary attack stat, which usually doubles as your primary AC stat, you're likely to grab con because you're experienced at high level play and you realize that low Con makes you susceptible to the myriad ways for a creature to inflict nasty effects like petrification, poisons, and paralysis. But also you want HP.

I guess I should say that having Con saves is a unwritten "reduce significant damage at a certain percent." Poison is still a highly relevant damage type when you're facing enemies and having a resourceless way to consistently succeed on them is extremely useful.

Indomitable is excellent to ensure a bad dice roll doesn't undermine that.

[OldTrees1]

Watching these threads get into the weeds is always interesting. Personally, I don't like the modern obsession with "balance." This obsession ruins games.

I will grant that an obsession with "balance" will ruin games. Direct comparisons (like the AoE math) are not really useful.

However these threads also contain stronger positions to consider. If characters are the same level, they should be able to engage with the same level of encounters. This is why my first post in this thread was asking what the OP envisioned tier 3-4 should be like. For me Tier 3 involved being able to engage in exotic and dangerous environments like an hour long encounter 1 mile in the air. So while I don't care if the DPS is exact, I do care that the characters can engage in those exotic dangerous environments.

Do people seriously expect a steel stick swinger in this world to be on the same level as someone who devoted their life to studying the arcane? I think if you do you are setting poor expectations for yourself.

Did you know D&D has this nifty little thing called levels? If a steel stick swinger is not on the same level as someone who devoted their life to studying the arcane, what will they become as they level up to get to the same level?

Although that is only talking about general level. So the nitty gritty argument about AoE DPS? Yeah, I am skipping that.

Sure designing for some things is harder and takes more creativity, but you are setting poor expectations for yourself if you have one of the 20th level characters actually only be 5th level (aka your not on the same level expectation).

This is why I personally like D&D vs say a video game based on a similar concept. Since the video game creators are obsessed with "balance" it takes so much away form characters that would and should be substantially more powerful in the fantasy setting then other characters.

Well if they are on different levels, then they would not be on the same level.

However if you are designing a game it is ideal if you can handle each character at each level. Now maybe that means the designer designs Ars Magica so that everyone is a mage. Or maybe the designer figures out what the steel stick swinger has to become before they can be on the same level as someone that has devoted their life to studying the arcane. Or the designer figures out what they want to be a challenge at each tier of play, and then designs each character class to be able to handle the broad and growth threats they would encounter.

So don't obsess about balance, but don't use a "same level" metaphor without realizing that is what levels are there for.

[Eldariel]

I dunno, this is a hard disagree for me.

After you get your primary attack stat, which usually doubles as your primary AC stat, you're likely to grab con because you're experienced at high level play and you realize that low Con makes you susceptible to the myriad ways for a creature to inflict nasty effects like petrification, poisons, and paralysis. But also you want HP.

I guess I should say that having Con saves is a unwritten "reduce significant damage at a certain percent." Poison is still a highly relevant damage type when you're facing enemies and having a resourceless way to consistently succeed on them is extremely useful.

Indomitable is excellent to ensure a bad dice roll doesn't undermine that.

So you'd rather take +1 Con than +4-+5 Wis-saves, which can completely incapacitate you and are poor to start with? You'd rather take +1 Con than 3/day reroll on any saves in Lucky that stacks with Indomitable (and also has utility and offensive uses)? It's not like Con-saves are the only debilitating thing in the game (and a second source of rerolls gives you more likelihood to succeed than +1 Con anyways). Even Shield Master with its +2-+5 Dex saves and ability to ignore Dex-based damage sources is a pretty significant step up.

If this is your logic, you should 100% be maxing Wis, not Con, because the most common and debilitating saves that can make you kill teammates are Wis. Con-based stuff is often stuff that deals damage such as poison, which can be resisted via HP while Wis-based stuff is often in the neighborhood of "save or you're out". And you already have decent Con, but your Wis/Int/Cha/Dex (unless you're a Dex Fighter) are likely to be weaker so what's gonna make you useless to your party is likely not a Con-save but an Int or a Wis or a Cha save.

Sorry but I don't buy this. If you want to maximise your party utility, the worst saves to fail are, pretty much in order, Cha > Wis = Int [Cha is often getting booted to another reality] and the most common of those, by far, is Wis. And those get more common on high levels. If you want to thus shore up your defenses, focus on the defenses that most need shoring up and are most impactful, rather than the one that's already quite good. If one is actually experienced in high level play, they'll know the mental saves are key. Even just fear aura: you simply can't approach a target you fear and ranged attacks are at disadvantage. And the DCs get so high that without proficiency you can't even make them.

[Asisreo1]

So you'd rather take +1 Con than +4-+5 Wis-saves, which can completely incapacitate you and are poor to start with? You'd rather take +1 Con than 3/day reroll on any saves in Lucky that stacks with Indomitable (and also has utility and offensive uses)? It's not like Con-saves are the only debilitating thing in the game (and a second source of rerolls gives you more likelihood to succeed than +1 Con anyways). Even Shield Master with its +2-+5 Dex saves and ability to ignore Dex-based damage sources is a pretty significant step up.

If this is your logic, you should 100% be maxing Wis, not Con, because the most common and debilitating saves that can make you kill teammates are Wis. Con-based stuff is often stuff that deals damage such as poison, which can be resisted via HP while Wis-based stuff is often in the neighborhood of "save or you're out". And you already have decent Con, but your Wis/Int/Cha/Dex (unless you're a Dex Fighter) are likely to be weaker so what's gonna make you useless to your party is likely not a Con-save but an Int or a Wis or a Cha save.

Sorry but I don't buy this. If you want to maximise your party utility, the worst saves to fail are, pretty much in order, Cha > Wis = Int [Cha is often getting booted to another reality] and the most common of those, by far, is Wis. And those get more common on high levels. If you want to thus shore up your defenses, focus on the defenses that most need shoring up and are most impactful, rather than the one that's already quite good. If one is actually experienced in high level play, they'll know the mental saves are key. Even just fear aura: you simply can't approach a target you fear and ranged attacks are at disadvantage. And the DCs get so high that without proficiency you can't even make them.

I value HP and high Con over most other ability scores like Wis and Cha because HP is the defacto way to get killed in the game.

Wisdom effects usually end and give immunity to the effect for 24-hours.

[Eldariel]

I value HP and high Con over most other ability scores like Wis and Cha because HP is the defacto way to get killed in the game.

Wisdom effects usually end and give immunity to the effect for 24-hours.

Which is why you should want to make that save...? I mean, fight an Ancient Dragon and attack at disadvantage without ability to close in. Such a Fighter is useless. Same with someone who gets charmed by a Succubus or Vampire or whatever. At worst, like getting dominated by a Lich or some such, you're actually actively going to be hurting your allies. I would never bring a Fighter (or any class) with +1 Wis saves and no immunities to a Tier 3-4 adventure. Like if I were an adventure group leader I'd just tell them "Sorry, you lack the willpower for this adventure". Because that's the truth. The probability of the Fighter contributing to TPK is too high to risk. Once the DCs get near 20, you need some bonuses even with a bunch of rerolls to have a reasonable chance.

OTOH 0 HP isn't actually that dangerous. It doesn't kill you, it just drops you. You need 3 more hits after dropping to zero to die. In this game it's very cheap to pick up an ally at 0. Even if you houserule in Exhaustion or whatever on yoyoing and keep death saves until long rest or some such, it's still pretty hard to actually die. What causes existential party failure is not getting dropped to zero HP, it's failing saves vs. effects that completely **** half the party over, in the worst case turning characters against the party and summarily executing the sane part.

[Dork_Forge]

Which is why you should want to make that save...? I mean, fight an Ancient Dragon and attack at disadvantage without ability to close in. Such a Fighter is useless. Same with someone who gets charmed by a Succubus or Vampire or whatever. At worst, like getting dominated by a Lich or some such, you're actually actively going to be hurting your allies. I would never bring a Fighter (or any class) with +1 Wis saves and no immunities to a Tier 3-4 adventure. Like if I were an adventure group leader I'd just tell them "Sorry, you lack the willpower for this adventure". Because that's the truth. The probability of the Fighter contributing to TPK is too high to risk. Once the DCs get near 20, you need some bonuses even with a bunch of rerolls to have a reasonable chance.

OTOH 0 HP isn't actually that dangerous. It doesn't kill you, it just drops you. You need 3 more hits after dropping to zero to die. In this game it's very cheap to pick up an ally at 0. Even if you houserule in Exhaustion or whatever on yoyoing and keep death saves until long rest or some such, it's still pretty hard to actually die. What causes existential party failure is not getting dropped to zero HP, it's failing saves vs. effects that completely **** half the party over, in the worst case turning characters against the party and summarily executing the sane part.

I'm currently running a tier 3 game with a character that has only just upped their Wisdom bonus to +1. I get him with Wis saves effects every now and then and it works out fine, it's just having a weakness like most characters have (and makes the game more interesting). At one point they had a pumped vampire as a BBEG, you know who I got with the charm? The Paladin with a +3 Cha and +1 Wis. Big bonuses don't necessarily mean anything and failing an effect doesn't mean you're useless (in your dragon example, if no ones can end the fear then just use ranged weapons, even Str based characters should have a ranged option). Saying that someone that doesn't have a decent Wis save shouldn't go on a tier 3-4 adventure because they'd contribute to a TPK is extreme to say the least.

The hp comment isn't even accurate either, you don't need 3 hits to die when you're down. A hit within 5ft is a crit and thus two failures, then there's actually failing the death saves (which is two failures on 1...). Even then you're not considering the effects at being at 0, you rate failing effects that make you lose turns right? Being at 0hp is an effect that makes you lose turns. The whole yoyo healing thing only works well when the initiative order permits the downed person to not lose turns or die still (if they get hit and fail a save before the healer is up, game over). Then it also depends on who went down, because depending on their max hp and what they're fighting, instadeath could very well be on the cards still depending on how the dice fall (particularly high roll, a crit or both tend to happen at really inopportune times).

Another annecdote because why not, that same party (now level 13 with a bunch of magic items and boons) are fighting a buffed stone golem. They are frequently failing Slow rolls (even though one of them was in the Paladin's +4 aura and had a decent bonus themselves), but that isn't scary to them. What's scary is that the Bard that hands out yoyo heals and temp hp is (as of the end of the last session) at 2hp with the golem still going strong.

[Asisreo1]

Which is why you should want to make that save...? I mean, fight an Ancient Dragon and attack at disadvantage without ability to close in. Such a Fighter is useless. Same with someone who gets charmed by a Succubus or Vampire or whatever. At worst, like getting dominated by a Lich or some such, you're actually actively going to be hurting your allies. I would never bring a Fighter (or any class) with +1 Wis saves and no immunities to a Tier 3-4 adventure. Like if I were an adventure group leader I'd just tell them "Sorry, you lack the willpower for this adventure". Because that's the truth. The probability of the Fighter contributing to TPK is too high to risk. Once the DCs get near 20, you need some bonuses even with a bunch of rerolls to have a reasonable chance.

OTOH 0 HP isn't actually that dangerous. It doesn't kill you, it just drops you. You need 3 more hits after dropping to zero to die. In this game it's very cheap to pick up an ally at 0. Even if you houserule in Exhaustion or whatever on yoyoing and keep death saves until long rest or some such, it's still pretty hard to actually die. What causes existential party failure is not getting dropped to zero HP, it's failing saves vs. effects that completely **** half the party over, in the worst case turning characters against the party and summarily executing the sane part.

I mean, fighters have plenty of ASIs in these higher tiers. You can really max out Con at level 12 and the rest of the ASI's could go into Wisdom or Resilient at these higher tiers.

But also, I fail to see how getting rid of Frightened is harder for a party than getting someone up from 0 HP considering that more classes have ways to mitigate Frightened than they have to bring someone up from 0.

That said, our experiences probably vary greatly because it has never made me feel useless. I have a weakness, like all other characters, and in order to overcome them, they need to have teeth.

That's also the problem with schrodinger's wizard. They have multiple abilities to overcome their extremely large and glaring weaknesses, but they do not have all of them at once, leaving holes in any particular wizard builds that can't be pinned down in any hypotheticals.

Fighters are usually constant. Not as many weaknesses but they usually have the one: low int, cha, or wis saves. Its easy to pick on them because they're more consistent but that doesn't mean that the fighter isn't strong.

[The_Jette]

Which is why you should want to make that save...? I mean, fight an Ancient Dragon and attack at disadvantage without ability to close in. Such a Fighter is useless. Same with someone who gets charmed by a Succubus or Vampire or whatever. At worst, like getting dominated by a Lich or some such, you're actually actively going to be hurting your allies. I would never bring a Fighter (or any class) with +1 Wis saves and no immunities to a Tier 3-4 adventure. Like if I were an adventure group leader I'd just tell them "Sorry, you lack the willpower for this adventure". Because that's the truth. The probability of the Fighter contributing to TPK is too high to risk. Once the DCs get near 20, you need some bonuses even with a bunch of rerolls to have a reasonable chance.

OTOH 0 HP isn't actually that dangerous. It doesn't kill you, it just drops you. You need 3 more hits after dropping to zero to die. In this game it's very cheap to pick up an ally at 0. Even if you houserule in Exhaustion or whatever on yoyoing and keep death saves until long rest or some such, it's still pretty hard to actually die. What causes existential party failure is not getting dropped to zero HP, it's failing saves vs. effects that completely **** half the party over, in the worst case turning characters against the party and summarily executing the sane part.

I think you guys are missing out on the fact that you approach this game from different angles. Eldariel, you seem to be of the opinion that you should focus on ensuring that your character has no weaknesses, or can cover your weaknesses with spells/special abilities. And, the guys you're arguing with seem to be of the opinion that they should focus on what their strong points are, and rely on their teammates to cover for their weaknesses. After all, your wizard doesn't need an amped up AC and hp if the party tank is keeping all the enemies from you, which is what their job is. And, if they fail their wisdom save against the Hold Person spell that the enemy just cast, well either the wizard can use their Dispel Magic to free the fighter, or one of the fighter's allies can damage the enemy into failing their concentration check.

So, Eldariel, you want your character to be able to do anything without relying on anyone else (from what it seems), and the others want to be able to rely on their teammates. That's all there really seems to be to it.

[Eldariel]

I mean, fighters have plenty of ASIs in these higher tiers. You can really max out Con at level 12 and the rest of the ASI's could go into Wisdom or Resilient at these higher tiers.

But also, I fail to see how getting rid of Frightened is harder for a party than getting someone up from 0 HP considering that more classes have ways to mitigate Frightened than they have to bring someone up from 0.

You drop to 0 HP, someone casts (Mass) Healing Word. It's a bonus action and you're now up. Compare that to e.g. frightened: Calm Emotions takes concentration and action. That's far more involved.

That said, our experiences probably vary greatly because it has never made me feel useless. I have a weakness, like all other characters, and in order to overcome them, they need to have teeth.

That's also the problem with schrodinger's wizard. They have multiple abilities to overcome their extremely large and glaring weaknesses, but they do not have all of them at once, leaving holes in any particular wizard builds that can't be pinned down in any hypotheticals.

Fighters are usually constant. Not as many weaknesses but they usually have the one: low int, cha, or wis saves. Its easy to pick on them because they're more consistent but that doesn't mean that the fighter isn't strong.

You should focus on the defenses you need the most. +1 Con is going to save you and your party less often than +3-+4 Wis if you face any high level monsters. So take Res: Wis first. Then Lucky is going to help you out more often than +1 Con (rerolling enemy crits is also a massive HP booster) so you take that first. And you really should take some weapon style feat: otherwise you're just wasting potential. At that point you're already 5 ASIs deep or level 12. Level 16 is when I could see you having a free ASI for +Con where you aren't losing out on something more likely to keep you alive and able to contribute for your party.

It's okay to have weaknesses but if you literally are forcing party to cast spells and use Concentration constantly to keep you active, they'd be better off without you. That's a fact. There's a line to be trodden between being someone allies can pour resources into and being a resource sink allies must pour resources into, hurting their ability to disable the enemy and protect the party.

I think you guys are missing out on the fact that you approach this game from different angles. Eldariel, you seem to be of the opinion that you should focus on ensuring that your character has no weaknesses, or can cover your weaknesses with spells/special abilities. And, the guys you're arguing with seem to be of the opinion that they should focus on what their strong points are, and rely on their teammates to cover for their weaknesses. After all, your wizard doesn't need an amped up AC and hp if the party tank is keeping all the enemies from you, which is what their job is. And, if they fail their wisdom save against the Hold Person spell that the enemy just cast, well either the wizard can use their Dispel Magic to free the fighter, or one of the fighter's allies can damage the enemy into failing their concentration check.

So, Eldariel, you want your character to be able to do anything without relying on anyone else (from what it seems), and the others want to be able to rely on their teammates. That's all there really seems to be to it.

No, this is not at all what I said. I just said that a Wizard can be tanky if he wants. That's all. If you want to take the role of the frontliner with a Wizard, that's more than fine. You can do it. I'd You can also play a squishier Wizard at range and use teammates. I did say that earlier. Both are valid ways to play: people just seem to have this strange misconception that frontline Wizard is somehow less tanky than a frontline Fighter because they lack Second Wind and have d6 HD even though they have a vast array of spells to make up the difference.

[The_Jette]

No, this is not at all what I said. I just said that a Wizard can be tanky if he wants. That's all. If you want to take the role of the frontliner with a Wizard, that's more than fine. You can do it. I'd You can also play a squishier Wizard at range and use teammates. I did say that earlier. Both are valid ways to play: people just seem to have this strange misconception that frontline Wizard is somehow less tanky than a frontline Fighter because they lack Second Wind and have d6 HD even though they have a vast array of spells to make up the difference.

They have been making some valid points. The wizard can have a lot of tankiness for a few rounds a day, more once they reach higher levels. But, if they spend all of their resources being a tank then they don't have those resources for anything else. A 3rd level Fighter has all day AC and damage. A 3rd level Wizard has... 4 1st level spell slots and 2 2nd level spell slots, I believe. And, they can't use any of those spell slots for teleporting, or damaging the enemy, or even buffing the party, because they're saving them in case they get hit. And, since they're upfront, they'll be getting hit a lot more often than they normally would. And, once they run out of spells, they can short rest to get 1 level 1 spell slot back. But, only once. And, then that's it. So, yeah, they can do it. Whether or not they're as effective as a fighter, who can keep it up all day, that's an individual opinion that you guys don't agree on.

[Eldariel]

They have been making some valid points. The wizard can have a lot of tankiness for a few rounds a day, more once they reach higher levels. But, if they spend all of their resources being a tank then they don't have those resources for anything else. A 3rd level Fighter has all day AC and damage. A 3rd level Wizard has... 4 1st level spell slots and 2 2nd level spell slots, I believe. And, they can't use any of those spell slots for teleporting, or damaging the enemy, or even buffing the party, because they're saving them in case they get hit. And, since they're upfront, they'll be getting hit a lot more often than they normally would. And, once they run out of spells, they can short rest to get 1 level 1 spell slot back. But, only once. And, then that's it. So, yeah, they can do it. Whether or not they're as effective as a fighter, who can keep it up all day, that's an individual opinion that you guys don't agree on.

Well, actually arcane recovery rounds up so level 3 Wizard has 6 first level slots (and ritual casting and cantrips, both of which are relevant combat contributions on this level: Unseen Servant can be a great bonus action with ball bearings and oil + create bonfire, while e.g. Minor Illusion and Mold Earth can punch pretty high up the weight class with smart use). Also, a level 3 Wizard doesn't need spells for comparable contribution: Light Crossbow + Familiar Help is actually comparable to what most martials can do at will, often even better (Fighting Style is only +2 for example). Of course, they probably will have those two level 2 slots for combat contribution (Dragon's Breath & Web are both very solid spells on this level as is Sleep) so when casting a spell is likely enough to prevent significant amounts of damage, there's little reason to not do it.

Again, Wizard's at-will is surprisingly good so it's not like you're burning resources left, right and center. You generally don't need that many Shield-spells per encounter for instance: most enemies will miss naturally and some will hit hard enough that it doesn't matter so it's for when you're facing lots of enemies. Which is probably not every encounter.