Cathsith21 posted some interesting observations about D&D. Some of them are relevant to spellcasting classes. I thought they could be discussed here.
Sure? Lets do that but i dont know what the topic would be? I agree i discussed pretty broadly but most of the time (at least i thought) i tried to answer points from other people who queoted me? I should probably have used quotes myself...
1) one point was probably that magic can do all that non mages can do but better which weirdly i think nobody ever disagreed with me before?
2) how can there a be a conflict of views in something that is pretty easy to calculate or guess? Either something is good or bad. If that is important is of course up to each one but if it is good or bad is most of thr time deductable and very easy id argue?
3) why would you cast healing word on a person that is not down or is down and will woth 99% likelyhood go down again before his turn will come? Thats why i came here my most hated combo vicious mockery and healing word. :)
that would probably be a summary of my rhoughts? :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
1) Sure that is a subjective view, but as soon as a world has powerful magic which is the case in a lot of fantasy settings I argue the authors should take into account what that means for a world. Like nobody would build castles, when there are dragons. Or when people can become invisble they could rob any rich person blind. So any spellcaster will be in a huge advantage which would lead to normal people kill all gifted people when they are children (Salem and co) or the magical people take over? Imagine you are an enchanter Wizard and morally neutral to evil and work closly for the king what would probably happen...
The same is a bit with DND. In the beginnig the martials have the advantage cause they are tankier and are not that resource intensive, but in 5e all caster have cantrips which are not far worse then weapon damage and the warlock can even enhance that to at least featless figher levlel damage. Not to mention moon druid. a Moon druid has multiatack at 2nd level and more HP than a barbarian. That subclass wins the early games while being a full caster and a healer while providing unlimited food for everybody (which kills any survival aspect). At level 5 with 3rd level spells most spellcaster become very strong and this continues until they are practically gods with wish and such spells.
And as said that is only if you play them relatively normal. I have seen so much crazy ideas like use move earth and dig a deep whole, use minor ilusion and let people fall for max falling damage. Use Shape water to throw bolders on enemy or create ice spices in pits. This you can do at level 1. Or rope trick hide in rope trick get out shout and get back. You are practically invicible. Or Magic mouths that warn you when there are invisible enemies enter 30 feet range...
So my solution which is probably very unpopular :) would be to make all adventurers mages. Make the EK spells a base feature of the Fighter and the same for the Rogue. Make them 3/4 casters by default and maybe make the AT and EK class makes them half casters.
2) To guess success or damage you only need like two calculations:
Take for example AC lets say 16 and deduct your to hit lets say 5. Which is now a 11. Meaning an 11-20 will end in a hit and a 1-10 will end in a not hit. That is 50%.
When a hit die is a D10 you just take 1+10 and divide it by 2 and have average damage. 5.5 in this case.
If combine this two and inlcude 1.05 for crits you already have the way you calculate damage for your build. I would argue that is extremly easy.
Why would sombody care for that?
When you attack an enemy with high AC and your to hit would be pretty low and you have a cantrip that forces a saving throw that should lead you to use that cantrip. Or maybe you have a roge in the party and your turn is then maybe better spend to give the rogue advantage instead of trying to do minor damage with very unlikely chances of success.
The quesiton now is of course is that even necessary? Does your DM even try to actually hurt you? If the fights are anyway completly easy and the DM does his best to run into your format the best way possible for you and does not attack downed player why bother. Esle this stuff just increases your effectiveness cause DND is a probability game like poker and there is a reason this game is mostly played by mathematicians and former chess players in the long run. And i expect even roleplaying is more fun when you are the guy who helped to defeat the Vampire lord and not the guy who did not hit once in the fight and then rolled death saves the rest of the game?
And based on the calcuations above i would wish that when people argue something is good, that they actually shortly checked if it is good and if they have checked it they could shortly provide that as prof. Like you do in the real world. I don't know how your job works, but you can't go to your boss and say lets do A cause its the best. Why is it the best? Cause i said so. Thats how dicussions on the internet often go, which i would argue is a waste of time cause like this no side will change their mind cuase there have not been shown any reason why the should change their mind?
Well, we could discuss the potential social realities of magic using people at length and not get very far. But as a counter to your argument that "gifted people" would be killed as children, remember that if some societies didn't kill theirs then your team has none and they have plenty of this resource that you describe as fearsome.
Your thesis (1) is that magic using PCs are much greater powered than non-magic using classes, right?
I think that this statement depends on how the player plays the PC and how the DM structures the campaign. The classic balancing point for this is a campaign 'day' that involves multiple combats as the normal practice. When this happens, the 'full-casters' must conserve and ration their spell slots since they are restored on a long rest. When you have to ration spell slots, a magic user isn't going to jump in and act like the rogue to steal something unless that appears to be the best play for the whole party and the spell slots necessary are part of that assessment.
Second point is that even if a spell caster is better at one thing, he is unlikely to be better at everything. I rarely see a spellcaster that can effectively tank, for example, although a Wall of Stone isn't bad. However, this only delays the battle, in case your intent was to win instead of escape.
During half of the combat encounters, your magic user is going to be counteracting the enemy spell caster. As a result your fellow PCs are going to need to use their features to deal with the other parts of the battlefield.
At this point, I don't see magic users as the omnipotent battlefield force. They can certainly be that for one round, or two or three, but they can't keep it up if the battle becomes long. Maybe I just haven't reached the top levels to see the final terror a spell caster can throw down. But as a Bard, I'm not sure my spell list is going to be all that damage focused.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
Most of you say what keeps them in check is the lengh of the day. What I agree on concept, but I would say as long as you only use spell slots when it really counts and don't throw fireballs at normal encounters you should be more then fine? if you take for example tomb of ahinilaiton. In the jungle you had two encounters a day and you are like 7-10. I don't have enough turns to use all my spells in that scenario. And ascent of avernus was stupid difficult but most of the time it was one encounter a day. I mean what is brutal is Mad mage cause if you can only rest after 16 hours. You have like 12 ecounters untill finally a day is over and you can take a long rest, which was not fun for any class and ended up in a lot of sneaking and then backtracking for 2 hours to rest in teh tavern.
And final point about resources lets take Warlock and Bladesinger. Warlock can shoot eldrich blast and hex (needs only a short rest) up to four times a round for ever (1-4 times 1D10+5+1D6). Thats better then a fighter with a greatsword or an archer withouth a feat. Also the Bladesinger can attack once with a Bow and then use his second attack for a cantrip (1D8+DEX modifier +1-4 times a D12 for toll the dead) which beats most fighters also in standard damgae. And the Bladesinger is even a full caster. Funny enough he is best played as a ranged fighter. :)
And regarding the tank. I don't know if you know the Hedgehog Wizard. Thats 1 Hexblade/x Abjuration wizard. The armor of agethys charges the ward and the ward prevents the armor of agethyes to decrease. So first of all the Wizard has a ton of HP and even does damage to everybody attacking it. And no my obligatory statement :) while being a full caster.
Regarding damage there is always teh nuclear Wizard which goes Hexblood/ x evocation wizard and only casts magic missle that do an absurd amounts of damage with no chance to fail (1D4+1+5 (Evocation)+6(Hexblad curse)) times missle which is 11 in case of a 9th level spell. :)
or the tempest cleric 2/ x scribe wizard where you can do max lightning damge i think twice a short rest. (Change the damage typ to lighnting and use channel divnity for each damage spell).
I follow one youtuber. Professor Dungeon Master (i think its the name). He is pretty old school and constantly complains that in the past Wizards started almost useless and then became very powerful if you survived this long. And now in 5e the cantrips makes spellcasters almost as good as fighters. I would not argue thats a bad thing but aparently thats something new in 5e and in the past spellcasters had to use weapons badly when they were out of spells. Which i remember from Baldurs Gate 1+2. My wizard threw a lot of stones with his sling and almost never hit with it.
Regarding hihg level spells. My favorit class is Wizard, but a Bard could take the spells as secrets, but a lot of the strengh of the spells are related to the correct subclass. It depens what you count but it starts already at 4th level ->Polymorph (Buff allies or take out enemies and transform them into a snale (Diviner), Banish (Diviner or Abjurer) and Arcane eye (Diviner almost free), 5th level->animate Object (Average damage 65 per round, non magical but it take that any time) and Wall of force (The reason Napeolon won eventhough his army in total was smaller divide and conquer), 6th Contingency (freedom of movement or dimension door or the spere i forgot the name) and Mass suggestion, 7th Forecage (no concentration required! Keep the bars far apart that you can attack it, no saving throw thus no legendary resistance) and simulacrum which gives you a second you or a dragon if you can catch one or can convince to copy him, clone that makes your party imortal, 8th level maze where they need to succed on a intenlligence save to get out which almost nobody is good or Dominate Monster (Enchanter or Divnier) and demi plane where you store your clones and a copy of your spellbook 9th level Wish cast any spell that exists and if you did not use it on that day just use it for a free simulacrum of you. Now oyu have two levle 17-20 wizards with all their spell slots. Or everybodies favorit use simulacrum on you while you have your 9th level slot and cast wish to cast simulacrum the new simulacrum now casts wish resp. simulacrum. My i introduce you to my armee of level 20 wizards. :)
That was only Wizard. I mean the aura of clerics spirit guardians is extremly powerful and a good magical secret.
in 5e all caster have cantrips which are not far worse then weapon damage and the warlock can even enhance that to at least featless figher levlel damage.
Being able to do similar damage to a Fighter doesn't make them equivalent unless you ignore everything else; first of all, if you're comparing ranged damage, the Fighter can take the Archery fighting style, meaning they miss less than the Warlock does. Second, the Fighter will have higher HP and AC, a free self-heal and action surge for dealing more damage in a single turn. In a contest between a Fighter and a Warlock I don't think I'd bet on the Warlock at early levels, and even at higher levels it's about how exactly they're built, what spells they have for their limited pact magic slots, and whether the Fighter saves against them.
Not to mention moon druid. a Moon druid has multiatack at 2nd level and more HP than a barbarian.
While druids are durable for casters, they're still not as durable as a Barbarian as HP is only part of the equation; a properly built Barbarian should have a better AC than most (all?) wildshape options the druid has for the same level, and the Barbarian will also have physical damage resistance, so a druid's extra HP from wild-shape can be burned through quickly. While multi-attack does give Circle of the Moon quite high damage at lower levels, that falls off over time, especially as you can gain no benefit from magic weapons.
That's not to say that a druid can't compete if that's the role you want to fill in a group, but the Barbarian is strong at tanking without any extra effort, and in most cases is still more durable in practice, and more importantly better at tanking which is what you usually want durability for anyway; tanking is more than just being able to take damage, it's about encouraging enemies to focus on you, which Barbarians can do for free with Reckless Attack (while dealing extra damage).
I have seen so much crazy ideas like use move earth and dig a deep whole, use minor ilusion and let people fall for max falling damage.
While spell creativity can be fun, a non-magical group can still set traps. You're also ignoring that enemies can see through Minor Illusion, in which case it only takes one to spot it and warn the others, and you've wasted a spell, which you're now going to miss when you're thrown into combat. It's down to a DM how easy such tricks are to pull off; if a caster is abusing magic to avoid fights entirely, and the rest of the group aren't happy with that, then a good DM can and should push back.
Part of the problem here is you're looking at classes far too situationally; a trap only works if you can set it up in advance, but by the same token a Fighter getting the drop on a caster could shove them prone then grapple with action surge (or extra attack, depending on level), which I think most DMs would agree would prevent most casting (if you're face down in the mud then speaking isn't easy, and someone pinning you to the ground isn't just going to let you freely move your arms for somatic or material components). At this point most casters are helpless, and the fighter can just headbutt them to death with advantage. A Rogue at early levels could one-shot a caster or have them near death with one good hit (then [action]hide[/action) while a Monk doesn't necessarily need the element of surprise to run up and punch a caster 3-4 times in the throat (and at higher levels the Monk can brute force Stunning Strike on a caster fairly easily, and only needs to succeed once to stun lock for them several rounds while dealing damage the entire time).
For everything there's a counter, and while casters can have more than most in a single package, nothing is guaranteed and nothing is without a countermeasure of its own; most casters on their own are one bad roll away from being in trouble, as a bad roll can mean an attack spell misses and does nothing, or an enemy saves and ignores your control spell, sees through your illusion and so-on. Casters are at their most powerful when they're part of a group, as that's what allows them to focus on doing one thing, while protecting them from the other things they can't simultaneously defend against otherwise. There's a reason that royal mages may have knights to protect them as they cast, liches will have undead minions to keep heroes at bay etc.
Sorry I am aprantely to stupid to quote in this forum. :)
1st quote) Fighter vs Warlock. Yes I discussed it in the previous thread and i agree i left it out. Fighters can be much better than a warlock, but have to be build "good" while even a player on his first DND can play a warlock that only shoots eldrich blast and casts hex. No thought required in playing and not much strategie involved in building. I admit a sentinel/polearm master or a sharp shooter fighter can be extremly usefull. Which i said in the previous posts but forgot here. But a Paladin with sentinel/polearm master is even a better combo and this is cause he is a half caster. What i agree the best archer in teh game is probably a Fighter, but even then we would need to pair it against the nuclear wizard. Don't know how it would end up. And that fighter is than only good at ranged damage and not much else. Wheres the nuclear wizard is still a wizard.
Lets say level 11 and like 10 rounds? Nuclear Wizard does 71.3 damage on average and (max 15 rounds until he needs arcane recovery or a long rest). While the fighter would be 64.4 damage on average (inlcuding action surge) but with a +2 (archery style)-5 penalty to hit for sharpshooter. So if we include to hit, we have a huge gap. That would close somewhere after may round 30 or so? But i don't think at that stage there is much left to fight? And I took level 11 cause the fighter gets his third attack. So i guess the higher we got the bigger the gap and the longer the wizard can shoot at maximal capacity?
And regarding HP I could imagine that hedgehog wizard (see above) is probably a contantatn for best Tank in 5e? could be wrong never a role I really cared to fill.
2nd quote) Yes i agree a moon druid is good for 1-4 levels and then you are a full caster cause of the issue with AC and HP. I just meant with this the fighters dont even dominate full caster in the level 1-4 where for example wizards are not that powerful. I would probably not play a moon druid where it goes over Tier 1.
EDIT: DND Powergamers tactic room just brought out a video Earthsinger - Moon Durid 9/ Bladesinger 11 on youtube. XD Mix The best Tier 1 combo with one of the best Tier 2 - Tier 3. His words not mine. To the best of my knowledge he never mentioned Druids before. :) I would say thats an example what sombody creative can do with DND? I would argue thats pretty hard for any non magical martial multiclass to beat? I mean aside from Social that build can do a lot of things extremly well?
3rd quote) PVP fight it depends on the level but in a pvp case i would prepare contingency resilients sphere when i am about to be hit trigger it, which makes me unreachable for a non spellcaster. Then its my trun and then you are dead, my slave or a snale (Diviner Wizard unless he is really unlucky with his portents). In such a rare case i teleport away and prepare and come back when you expect it the least. ;)
In PVE i have dimension door as contingency and just let me teleport away. Also a spell scroll with misty step solves teh whole not being able to use your mouth problem like silence. and when you argue a grappeld wizard could not even wave his arms how do grappeld oppennts beat you with their swords if the caster can move his hands? Thats a bit harsh houseruling but nevertheless for such emergencies you have spellscrolls or the metamagic feat. What i have heard some people do who think aparantly as well that spell casting is to strong they let you role to succed at a spell. An arcana check. I don't know if i like that or not. But i played a game Dungeon of nehubalak and they had that feature and natural 1s on a spell were always hilarious. And as compensation spells could crit and were like cast one level higher.
Thats actually not how minor ilussion works but of course if the DM says its otherwise it is otherwise. :) It would need first of to spot it during an attack which is already huge metagaming of the DM and then he would need to take an action and make an investigation check and succed that the ilusion is not real for him. But I agree thats working once in a campaign but that was an example of a cantrip. With leveled spell you can do a lot more shanigans. But thats the best thing you can do when you are a spellcaster and at that level where a good sneeze can kill even a barbarian. :)
Sorry I am aprantely to stupid to quote in this forum. :)
Just click Quote in the bottom right of the post you want; if you want to respond to multiple different parts (as I usually do) then the easiest way is to hit Quote, trim it down to just the bit you want, respond to that, then hit quote again and trim for the next part and so-on.
Lets say level 11 and like 10 rounds? Nuclear Wizard does 71.3 damage on average and (max 15 rounds until he needs arcane recovery or a long rest). While the fighter would be 64.4 damage on average (inlcuding action surge) but with a +2 (archery style)-5 penalty to hit for sharpshooter. So if we include to hit, we have a huge gap. That would close somewhere after may round 30 or so? But i don't think at that stage there is much left to fight? And I took level 11 cause the fighter gets his third attack. So i guess the higher we got the bigger the gap and the longer the wizard can shoot at maximal capacity?
Again the problem with the way you're looking at it is that you're only focusing on one thing; in a ranged slugging contest where you just stand still at range and hit each other then without any other considerations a caster will probably win, but the reverse can be true if you just stand in melee range and punch each other. This is pure white room theory-crafting as fights in D&D shouldn't just be an empty kill box where everybody just trades blows.
EDIT: DND Powergamers tactic room just brought out a video Earthsinger - Moon Durid 9/ Bladesinger 11 on youtube. XD Mix The best Tier 1 combo with one of the best Tier 2 - Tier 3. His words not mine.
I wouldn't rely on such videos as they invariably have exactly the same problem; they go out of their way to theory craft everything in D&D as if raw damage is all that ever matters, it's not. I've watched a bunch of videos on YouTube for various classes, and they always fall into the same trap of trying to boil something down to some kind of single set of number, but the moment you do that you're excluding huge sections of the game entirely, to theorise about a situation that may never actually exist in a real game.
You could argue that spellcasters can be used to break the game most easily, but that doesn't necessarily make their classes stronger as while coming up with the most broken builds might be an amusing though exercise, it doesn't make a bit of a difference if your DM won't let you play them, or pushes back to nerf or bypass whatever's broken about them. One key thing about D&D is that it's driven by a DM; in practice no class is weak or strong with a good DM, as they'll adjust to balance things out so every player gets equal chance to do their thing.
i would prepare contingency resilients sphere when i am about to be hit trigger it, which makes me unreachable for a non spellcaster. Then its my trun and then you are dead, my slave or a snale
There are quite a few caveats with this plan:
You need to have it in your spell list, and among your known/prepared spells.
To ready Otiluke’s Resilient Sphere you need to use your action in your turn, meaning you've lost at least one opportunity to do anything to your enemy.
It's a 4th level spell, meaning it's quite an expensive way to avoid taking damage for one round, especially if the enemy doesn't actually set off your trigger (as you cast the spell as part of readying it, meaning you lose the slot even if you don't end up using it).
The reaction for Ready occurs after the trigger, so if you specified "an enemy attacks me" they'll get to hit and damage you before you can do it, in which case you may lose concentration and lose the spell that way instead. There are ways to game this, e.g- "I cast it if the enemy gets within five feet" but you may not find your DM lets you (triggers and when they occur are up to your DM).
While damage cannot pass through the sphere (in either direction), the sphere is also weightless, meaning while your opponent cannot hit you, then can pick you up and throw you into any nearby environmental hazard (off a ledge, into the sea, down a pit etc.).
If you drop the sphere and your target saves against whatever you do to them, you're now within easy reach with no protection.
Also a spell scroll with misty step solves teh whole not being able to use your mouth problem like silence.
Spells bound to scrolls still require vocal or somatic components if the original spell does ‐ they're only exempted from material components.
you argue a grappeld wizard could not even wave his arms how do grappeld oppennts beat you with their swords if the caster can move his hands?
A normal standing grapple just reduces a target's speed to 0 at a cost of one hand for the grappler, so both can still act normally with no other conditions. But nothing in the rules says you can't grapple by grabbing a target's arm, wrist or hand, or that you can't seek to use both hands if you want to, it's up to your DM.
The specific example I gave though is pinning a target, which you do by knocking them prone then grappled (or vice versa) which pins an opponent such that they can't get up at all without breaking your grapple first. It's hard to imagine many situations where being pinned in this way leaves you able to freely move your arms in the exact way that you need to in order to cast a spell.
Granted it's an area in D&D that's poorly specified, as spells don't actually say what hand or arm movement is required; but "free use of one hand" can easily be argued to mean a caster must be able to take unrestricted movements with their hand such as drawing a sigil in the air (i.e- it's more than just being able to twitch a finger otherwise it's a pointless feature).
a good sneeze can kill even a barbarian
I'm not sure what kind of barbarians you're referring to, but the gap between a caster and barbarian's hitpoints grow extremely rapidly, especially when you account for resistances. While there are spells that could render a barbarian harmless for a few rounds (again though, it usually only takes one save to ruin that plan), there are none that should be able to kill one outright even at 9th level, as by the time you get a 9th level spell your average Barbarian is pushing well over 200 hitpoints.
To ready Otiluke’s Resilient Sphere you need to use your action in your turn, meaning you've lost at least one opportunity to do anything to your enemy.
I believe they said it was linked by a Contingency spell, not as a readied action.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
I'm not sure what kind of barbarians you're referring to, but the gap between a caster and barbarian's hitpoints grow extremely rapidly, especially when you account for resistances. While there are spells that could render a barbarian harmless for a few rounds (again though, it usually only takes one save to ruin that plan), there are none that should be able to kill one outright even at 9th level, as by the time you get a 9th level spell your average Barbarian is pushing well over 200 hitpoints.
This was related to saying at level 1 or 2 you can't do much and you die pretty fast, but taht is for all classes at level 2 and especially level 1.
Lets say level 11 and like 10 rounds? Nuclear Wizard does 71.3 damage on average and (max 15 rounds until he needs arcane recovery or a long rest). While the fighter would be 64.4 damage on average (inlcuding action surge) but with a +2 (archery style)-5 penalty to hit for sharpshooter. So if we include to hit, we have a huge gap. That would close somewhere after may round 30 or so? But i don't think at that stage there is much left to fight? And I took level 11 cause the fighter gets his third attack. So i guess the higher we got the bigger the gap and the longer the wizard can shoot at maximal capacity?
Again the problem with the way you're looking at it is that you're only focusing on one thing; in a ranged slugging contest where you just stand still at range and hit each other then without any other considerations a caster will probably win, but the reverse can be true if you just stand in melee range and punch each other. This is pure white room theory-crafting as fights in D&D shouldn't just be an empty kill box where everybody just trades blows.
I think we are not talking the same thing i guess? Cause based on my perspective i specifliy said that this archer wich lost in ranged combat against the wizard is only an archer while the wizard is a Wizard and can do 100 other things with his magic what the archer can not. And also an archer is not good in melee combat? Probably worse than a Wizard doing toll the dead whihc you can do close quarter, but you would probably combo misty step and then toll the dead to get out of range. And as somebody who played the mage in every game that lets you play one or even close i agree standing far enough back is a skill that a mage must need to learn or else he gets mocked and reseructed pretty often or i have just mean friends. :). I quote now rpgbot when you get hit as a wizard you have other problems. Which i find a bit bold but still funny. :) And wizard has a lot defensive options like Mirror Image and Mage Armor and Shield give like 20-21 AC so, not bad either for the beginning. Not to metion a Abjurer or Bladedancer.
And regarding the builds i would never play a nuclear Wizard. That is boring as hell. But the Hedgehog sounds fun to be honest and i will maybe try some day. Be a Wizard and extremly tanky? If that is not funny and you finally can use war caster the part where people flee from you which usally does not happen as a wizard. :)
EDIT: DND Powergamers tactic room just brought out a video Earthsinger - Moon Durid 9/ Bladesinger 11 on youtube. XD Mix The best Tier 1 combo with one of the best Tier 2 - Tier 3. His words not mine.
I wouldn't rely on such videos as they invariably have exactly the same problem; they go out of their way to theory craft everything in D&D as if raw damage is all that ever matters, it's not. I've watched a bunch of videos on YouTube for various classes, and they always fall into the same trap of trying to boil something down to some kind of single set of number, but the moment you do that you're excluding huge sections of the game entirely, to theorise about a situation that may never actually exist in a real game.
You could argue that spellcasters can be used to break the game most easily, but that doesn't necessarily make their classes stronger as while coming up with the most broken builds might be an amusing though exercise, it doesn't make a bit of a difference if your DM won't let you play them, or pushes back to nerf or bypass whatever's broken about them. One key thing about D&D is that it's driven by a DM; in practice no class is weak or strong with a good DM, as they'll adjust to balance things out so every player gets equal chance to do their thing.
No its the other way around i like to discuss such things and that are the only people that like to discuss such things as well. I was once in a forum in FB and there i completly agree with you. I left the forum cause i had a discussion with somebody completly overestimating animate dead. I gave him like 30 examples why he can't just expect teh max number of undead unchecked. (we called that withe room blabla) And like 5 people were attacking me for giving him advice. Which i found a bit confusing and decided to leave that group. But in youtube the other comments are usually the same direction as my own and Treantmonk and DND tactic rooms often dicuss their video with their viewers what i like.
Regarding this video. I can highly recommend the creator cause this guy is throughly like i have not seen somebody doing it for a hobby. I found him when i was frustrated on the scribe wizard cause i hated it and everybody said how great it is. He said as well that the subclass was meh but showed how he would use this features and i was like WTF this subclass is broken? I Funny enough he said in teh Moondruid/Bladesinger video something like the following: "damage is completly overated. I agree based on my stragegy its one of 7 principles but there are 6 ohters. Nevertheless I know most of you care for the damage thats why i show it in my build..." Further he even includes tactics for each level from 1-20. some of the time its cast darkness and shift as bonus action action as a blindsight creature and then attacks in the darkness spell. I would argue that is a pretty good tactic and not at all white room blabla? And the genius of this combination is that you use the defensive buffs a wizard gets and puts it on the shifted anamial which compensates all the negative parts of the moon druid. So I would argue thats a contender for one of the best builds i have ever seen?
Why would a DM ban that. He can just make the encounter a bit more dificult. And if the DM allows peace and twilight domains which i think i have not heard yet sombody ban, i would argue that nothing needs to be banned?
cy resilients sphere when i am about to be hit trigger it, which makes me unreachable for a non spellcaster. Then its my trun and then you are dead, my slave or a snale
There are quite a few caveats with this plan:
You need to have it in your spell list, and among your known/prepared spells.
To ready Otiluke’s Resilient Sphere you need to use your action in your turn, meaning you've lost at least one opportunity to do anything to your enemy.
It's a 4th level spell, meaning it's quite an expensive way to avoid taking damage for one round, especially if the enemy doesn't actually set off your trigger (as you cast the spell as part of readying it, meaning you lose the slot even if you don't end up using it).
The reaction for Ready occurs after the trigger, so if you specified "an enemy attacks me" they'll get to hit and damage you before you can do it, in which case you may lose concentration and lose the spell that way instead. There are ways to game this, e.g- "I cast it if the enemy gets within five feet" but you may not find your DM lets you (triggers and when they occur are up to your DM).
While damage cannot pass through the sphere (in either direction), the sphere is also weightless, meaning while your opponent cannot hit you, then can pick you up and throw you into any nearby environmental hazard (off a ledge, into the sea, down a pit etc.).
If you drop the sphere and your target saves against whatever you do to them, you're now within easy reach with no protection.
This was for a hypothetical PVP fight i have never seen in DND which i think was your point saying that a fighter/roge/ monk could win cause they strike first:
case 1: I go first. I cast dominate person/monster or polymorph and use my portent that le me succed on my spell. You are now bakring or kneeling. If we are lower level i cast rope trick climb up and take the rope with me wait your turn then climb down hurt you and climb up. repeat.
Case 2: You go first. you try to strike me which trigger my sphere (contingency as ophidimancer said thx :)) and ends your turn unless there is something within 15 feets you can use to destroy it. And yes contingency is a pretty common spell as you can prepare it beforehand. (10days duration). That is a must take at level 11 (i think). At low levels I have a magic mouth prepared that cries enemy when somebody with the intent of hurting me is within 30 feet. So you probably reach me, but at this level hopfully my mage armor shield combo helps me. Not to metion i have two portents (which don't need a reaction). After your turn see case 1.
Also a spell scroll with misty step solves teh whole not being able to use your mouth problem like silence.
Spells bound to scrolls still require vocal or somatic components if the original spell does ‐ they're only exempted from material components.
I must admit this one i heard recently and found very clever but could not use myself yet. But i agree it looks like it would not help so back to metagmagic option feat for this scenario or in case i need to evade an enemy counter spell. :)
you argue a grappeld wizard could not even wave his arms how do grappeld oppennts beat you with their swords if the caster can move his hands?
A normal standing grapple just reduces a target's speed to 0 at a cost of one hand for the grappler, so both can still act normally with no other conditions. But nothing in the rules says you can't grapple by grabbing a target's arm, wrist or hand, or that you can't seek to use both hands if you want to, it's up to your DM.
The specific example I gave though is pinning a target, which you do by knocking them prone then [Tooltip Not Found] (or vice versa) which pins an opponent such that they can't get up at all without breaking your grapple first. It's hard to imagine many situations where being pinned in this way leaves you able to freely move your arms in the exact way that you need to in order to cast a spell.
Granted it's an area in D&D that's poorly specified, as spells don't actually say what hand or arm movement is required; but "free use of one hand" can easily be argued to mean a caster must be able to take unrestricted movements with their hand such as drawing a sigil in the air (i.e- it's more than just being able to twitch a finger otherwise it's a pointless feature).
I mean i would agree that grappling is currently bad in its state and your suggestion makes absolutly sense for me. I mean in every adult fantasy book the fighters try to break the fingers of the casters. Still I can say that grapples would not be the end of me, cause it may be pretty specific but i my wizards all have telecinetic. I go Int 17 that i can take telecinetic at level 4 since tashas cause all the other caster feats are so boring. Its also great to shove people into AOEs or into blizzards or other hazards which are aparently wating behind every corner based on your PVP strategy. ;)
P.s. Thanks for the tip with quoting, but weird that this is so compalicated and we cant select the part we want to quote?
Also the Bladesinger can attack once with a Bow and then use his second attack for a cantrip (1D8+DEX modifier +1-4 times a D12 for toll the dead) which beats most fighters also in standard damgae.
Attacking with a bow ends the bladesong, is that really a good idea? Seems better to go out of your way to make sure you're proficient with hand crossbows, since they won't end the bladesong.
I would argue the best way to play a bladesong is ignore the melee aspect of that subclass. Just use the baldesong defensivly and dont attack with the bow while its on. Also i think the wording even prohibits hand crossbow cause it must be a one handed melee attack i think? Else i a gree that would be the better choice and would wven slightly increase the damage.
edit: i cant find it in the class description. Would have sworn i have seen the discussion and the consensis was it would break baldesong, but i dont find it?
edit 2: the consenis was cause all the styles are described and cross bow was not among them. Also in song of victory it is stated a melee weapon attack. Surprised that was enough reason for me to ignore that option? But it would be expensive to get crossbow expertise unless you have it from your race? The best dip artificer has only in the UA hand crossbows. So you would need to start as a fighter and the are one level behind which i would argue is probably to expensive for on adding like 5.5 damage while bladesong is on per turn. Unless you also get archery style and con saves... i would argue depends on the lengh of the campaign. If its long the 1 level is probabl haunt you. If i had not started as a fighter i could cast now the spell xy, but if its only tier 2 would probably be not a big issue?
All bows are two-handed: You can use a bonus action to start the Bladesong, which lasts for 1 minute. It ends early if you are incapacitated, if you don medium or heavy armor or a shield, or if you use two hands to make an attack with a weapon. You can also dismiss the Bladesong at any time (no action required).
Starting with hand crossbow requires Drow if your GM is refusing the Tasha's rule for swapping out racial proficiencies - otherwise, several flavors of half-elf and elf can swap to it, or you can just use a sling, which is only 1 less damage on average, and you start proficient with it.
Song of Victory is the only melee-specific ability on Bladesingers, I think, but you're gonna die in a big hurry with Bladesong off. One arrow and one cantrip-or-arrow isn't going to murder your enemy before they close the distance and start asking you deep, personal questions, and if you use neither Bladesong nor Extra Attack, you probably need to rethink your subclass choices.
All bows are two-handed: You can use a bonus action to start the Bladesong, which lasts for 1 minute. It ends early if you are incapacitated, if you don medium or heavy armor or a shield, or if you use two hands to make an attack with a weapon. You can also dismiss the Bladesong at any time (no action required).
There is a reddit discussion about this topic whihc i quoted. Cause i asked myself the same question if its ok or not and like all reddit discussion some people say yes and other not. I would say RAW you can, but RAI probably not. The sub class is called Bladsinger and in the fluff they even showed all different styles a Bladesinger would use. High indication for RAI. So i would argue its up to the DM, but I don't think it should be a problem to allow it. The damge is not that big withouth investment in shartshooter or cross bow expert and even then not comparable to a Fighter Archer.
Starting with hand crossbow requires Drow if your GM is refusing the Tasha's rule for swapping out racial proficiencies - otherwise, several flavors of half-elf and elf can swap to it, or you can just use a sling, which is only 1 less damage on average, and you start proficient with it.
You are right completly forgot that tashas lets you swap Weapon proficnecies. So the usual choice for bladesinger being a High elf could swad Swords for cross bow expert. Good point.
Does not help my usual race choices but for all the people that are not yet bored with the LOTR gang that is of course helpfull. :)
Song of Victory is the only melee-specific ability on Bladesingers, I think, but you're gonna die in a big hurry with Bladesong off. One arrow and one cantrip-or-arrow isn't going to murder your enemy before they close the distance and start asking you deep, personal questions, and if you use neither Bladesong nor Extra Attack, you probably need to rethink your subclass choices.
The old Bladesinger was considered bad cause it forced you into melee which as a wizard is rarely a good strategy. Further why on earth would a full caster waste his action to punch stuff with a stick or even worse are rsiking your precious concentration to break. The new subclass is considered one of the best Wizard Subclasses (not Diviner or Chronurgist level of course) but still very good. What is the main difference between the version, that you can replace a wepaon attack for a cantrip which substantionally increases your damage. And a blade singer is a Wizard so that is most of the time your job not to get caught by the enmies. But a Bladesinger has the possiblity to go bladesong in a tight space and has a higher chance of survival as an ilusionist because of his defensive powers. With this reasoning you should not play a wizard at all, cuase the enemey can just close to you and attack you?
Maybe we have a misunderstanding a Bladesinger would like a normal wizard (in an important battle, not an easy encounter of course) in Turn 1 maybe cast mirror image, rope trick or whatever defense you use, then use a concentration spell like hypnotic pattern, sleetstorm, slow or what is your cup of tea (or reverse if all enemies stand perfect in one place you start of course with hypnotic pattern) and then hold back and like every other wizard blast form a far cantrips. The only difference is that the bladesinger can attack also with a bow which is a slight increase in damage and when attacked can use his superior defense capabilites prevent constituion saving throws from happening? So this wizard has an extrem high chance of holding concnentration and controlling the battlefield (Divide) which lets the rest of the party do the conquering part. If that is not good i think we have substationally different philosophies in stragegy? If the austrian did not find a way to counter that trick we would all speak french now and would not measure spells in feet but in meters. ;)
The Abjurer has similiar defensive abilities cause the Ward hinders as well a forced saving throw, but has not the same advantage in damage and AC. Making it a bit better then the Abjurer i would argue. The same for War Wizard, but there i just find the features a bit boring eventhough they are good.
Regarding the chronurgist, he goes usually first which is huge for a controler and the 10th level abitlity lets you cast tiny hut as an action, which is a pretty usuefull buff being invicible when its not your turn. :) Or alternatively you can give your famliar a concentration spell and lets you use two concentration spells at the same time.
And Diviner can in most cases just decide if you fail a saving throw or not, which for example with dominate monster, polymorph or banishment is huge. Also he can scout out the whole dungeon or whatver almost for free.
Making this two the best based on my opinion and a lot of other people.
To ready Otiluke’s Resilient Sphere you need to use your action in your turn, meaning you've lost at least one opportunity to do anything to your enemy.
I believe they said it was linked by a Contingency spell, not as a readied action.
Okay, but all my other points still apply; the triggering condition still doesn't mean it automatically works before you take damage, and it isn't the instant invulnerability that people think it is, as you can be moved into harms way for when the spell drops, or your opponent can simply move to where you can't attack them and wait you out. In practice the only way I've actually seen it used in practice is as a panic button when you're in danger of being overwhelmed, as it can give you a chance to heal yourself, but you're pretty reliant on the rest of your party to actually make it work otherwise enemies can just toss you off a cliff (and technically it doesn't actually prevent fall damage, as the sphere itself is what you would be colliding with), or ready their actions and swarm you again the moment it drops.
This was related to saying at level 1 or 2 you can't do much and you die pretty fast, but taht is for all classes at level 2 and especially level 1.
Even at levels 1 and 2 your average Barbarian is still far more durable than your average caster; at those kind of levels the Barbarian already has Rage, while a caster only really has Blade Ward to compete (which means losing your ability to do anything else at those levels). Everyone is flimsier at those levels, but your average Barbarian is still a formidable tank by early level standards, your average Fighter will have a solid AC and so-on.
I think we are not talking the same thing i guess? Cause based on my perspective i specifliy said that this archer wich lost in ranged combat against the wizard is only an archer while the wizard is a Wizard and can do 100 other things with his magic what the archer can not.
Only if they lose; you're being very favourable towards casters while being unfavourable towards anything else because casters being superior is the conclusion that you're determined to draw so you're ignoring things that don't support that view.
This is common in all such discussions, but you end up assuming an ideal set of circumstances that will almost never actually play out in practice; while casters in theory could have an answer to everything, in reality this is less often the case as you've got spell choice pressures, action economy pressures, resource pressures and preparation pressures that all add up to make being a full caster more challenging than you seem to want to admit.
And also an archer is not good in melee combat? Probably worse than a Wizard doing toll the dead whihc you can do close quarter
Where do you get this idea? Fighters and Rangers are proficient in all weapons; they are extremely good in melee as well as at range, that's kind of the entire point of these classes. You mention using Toll the Dead as a fallback, but that only gives you a single chance to succeed or fail, if the target passes the save you do zero damage. Most martials meanwhile have at least two opportunities to hit and damage you; this is why Monks aren't as low damage as some people like to claim, because more attacks means more opportunities to hit, which means missing does less to affect your damage output.
you would probably combo misty step and then toll the dead to get out of range
How? Misty Step only moves you 30 feet, your average martial can close that gap back to hitting you range. If you mean to remain at range then you're not describing a melee fight, and even then your opponent has the option of dashing towards you to either close the distance or force you to burn through spells faster.
This was for a hypothetical PVP fight i have never seen in DND which i think was your point saying that a fighter/roge/ monk could win cause they strike first:
case 1: I go first. I cast dominate person/monster or polymorph and use my portent that le me succed on my spell.
This is what I'm talking about; you're assuming the perfect ideal circumstances for your caster in every case. This isn't something that all casters can do, it's something that one very specific build of caster can do, and only if they rolled the way they needed to at the start of the day, and only if your opponent hasn't got another way to save (if a Fighter saves first time and you use a portent dice, then they could use Indomitable to roll again for example). Either you assume ideal circumstances for both opponents, or you're just choosing only the circumstances that support the outcome you want.
Even if you do manage to succeed on Hold Person, they get to save again in their turn to end it, at which point you're one portent dice down and if you want to hold them again that's another turn and another spell slot to do-so. Even with Polymorph, what are you going to do then? You can't damage them or they'll just come back, and it's not really a free hit in such a case as while you might deal excess damage, you could have dealt more by not giving them an extra buffer of hit-points. There are some options but it's again assuming a lot of ideal circumstances and everything going your way, as even if being polymorphed reduces a target's saves, they can still pass them.
If we are lower level i cast rope trick climb up and take the rope with me wait your turn then climb down hurt you and climb up. repeat.
Your opponent can simply ready their attacks and hit you as soon as you emerge, in which case you take just as much damage as normal.
They also have other options depending upon whether your rope trick is the full sixty feet in the air; the higher up rope trick is, the safer it is from interference (blocking the entrance or such) but you also have to actually climb that rope. If you put it at the full sixty feet then keep in mind you can only climb at half speed (and an enemy can climb after you or you knock you off it). If it's low enough (e.g- constrained by a ceiling) then they may be able to block it, or maybe hold a flame under it (the spell only states that attacks and spells can't pass through, it says nothing about good old mundane smoke 😈).
I love rope trick, but it's most useful when you can get inside it while out of view; e.g- run into a room, lock the door and while they're bashing it down hide in your own personal pocket dimension till they go away, turn their back or whatever.
Case 2: You go first. you try to strike me which trigger my sphere (contingency as ophidimancer said thx :)) and ends your turn unless there is something within 15 feets you can use to destroy it.
Even with contigency this still isn't really an ideal plan, as your enemy doesn't need to destroy the sphere, they can simply wait it out. (it only lasts a minute) It's also worth noting that it's the caster whose movement speed is reduced, for anyone else they just need to be able to carry you to move normally, and your average high Strength martial should be able to do so, and even those that can't can still dash to move you further.
It's also not the only thing they can do at all; everyone can use the Ready action and simply wait for your sphere to drop before attacking you anyway. Resilient Sphere in practice only delays attacks, it doesn't prevent them unless you have a party to back you up.
Spells bound to scrolls still require vocal or somatic components if the original spell does ‐ they're only exempted from material components.
I must admit this one i heard recently and found very clever but could not use myself yet. But i agree it looks like it would not help so back to metagmagic option feat for this scenario or in case i need to evade an enemy counter spell. :)
There are still some limits even with metamagic (which is also a finite resource, espeically when taken as a feat) as you still may require material components (or access to your focus), which an opponent can also seek to prevent (or can try to disarm you of your focus using the Disarm rule in the Dungeon Master's Guide).
While you might be able to cast a spell with the right combination of circumstances it may still not be the one that helps you the most. And none of these is an answer to a Monk just running up and punching you in the throat with Stunning Strike; you only have to fail one constitution save (which only sorcerers get proficiency in as standard) and you're in the same theoretical predicament as anyone you manage to cast a Hold onto, except that a Monk has a much higher chance of success both initially and to maintain it, as all Monks can force up to four saves per turn, while simultaneously dealing damage (which only increases once the first stun succeed).
I mean i would agree that grappling is currently bad in its state and your suggestion makes absolutly sense for me.
Actually my issue is less with grappling (which IMO works fine, you just need to combine it with something else to make the most of it), it's more that the somatic component description doesn't really clarify what "free use of one hand" means. It has to be more than just having a free hand, otherwise it'd be a largely pointless requirement for a spell, but there are no clear examples. Vocal components actually have the same; the rules don't really give examples of what's enough to prevent speech for casting, i.e- is a hand over the mouth enough, or is that only muffled rather than silenced?
In both cases it's largely down to your DM as a common sense case, so if someone is actively seeking to stop you from casting with a grapple, then it's reasonable to let that happen if they have a clear idea of how they're doing it (and how that restricts themselves in return, as a bear hug to pin arms for example means you can't use yours either).
A telekenetic shove requires a failed Strength save to work; your average martial is usually going to have this as one of their best saves; Barbarian, Fighters, Monks and Rangers all have proficiency as standard, and Barbarians have advantage while raging.
To try and summarise; my point isn't that casters aren't flexible, and can't in theory have an answer for most situations, but in practice it's not so simple. Casters have pressures that other classes simply don't have in terms of spell selection pressure, spell slot pressure, concentration, preparation and so-on, and a very large number of spells are all-or-nothing; they either work or they don't, and when they don't is when you're in trouble, as it can mean you've spent an entire turn doing essentially nothing.
Most martials by comparison can maintain a high level of performance no matter how long a dungeon crawl lasts, and perform well even when short rests aren't possible (if you have a stock of potions to cover healing), though Monks will suffer in that scenario.
One other argument you've made is that Palladins are better than other martials because they're half-casters, but you can actually flip that argument around; they're better than other casters because they're half-martial. When a Palladin runs out of spells, or finds themselves inside an anti-magic field, or wants to converse slots etc., they're still a formidable opponent without any spells at all thanks to high HP and AC, strong and reliable attacks with no resource cost etc.
To ready Otiluke’s Resilient Sphere you need to use your action in your turn, meaning you've lost at least one opportunity to do anything to your enemy.
I believe they said it was linked by a Contingency spell, not as a readied action.
Okay, but all my other points still apply; the triggering condition still doesn't mean it automatically works before you take damage, and it isn't the instant invulnerability that people think it is, as you can be moved into harms way for when the spell drops, or your opponent can simply move to where you can't attack them and wait you out. In practice the only way I've actually seen it used in practice is as a panic button when you're in danger of being overwhelmed, as it can give you a chance to heal yourself, but you're pretty reliant on the rest of your party to actually make it work otherwise enemies can just toss you off a cliff (and technically it doesn't actually prevent fall damage, as the sphere itself is what you would be colliding with), or ready their actions and swarm you again the moment it drops.
Contingency RAW could trigger the second you decide in your head to attack me? Thats why most DM rule it otherwise. Cause it would give you omniscience about specific topics by triggering the contingency.
In Fantasy there is a saying a Wizard can beat anybody as long as they are prepared and when i would prepare for PVP against a fighter i know what he can do and would prepare for all that. for example i dip aritficer most of teh time with wizard and feather fall is one spell i have for such cases aready in my repertoir? Of course that does not work in a normal campaign as we don't konw what we face excactly. And if you stand there an ready an action you can do one attack, that first of all i could portent to not hit or maybe shield? What are the chances of hitting me and for what damage? even a wizard can take one great axe attack even a crit? But again have you ever experienced PVP in DND? I mean if you are an experienced PVP player I take your word for it, cause i have never seen it, but i have the feeling in one on one and nowing who i would fight I could probably beat most as a Divnier wizard of sufficent level? Cause of portent it does not matter how good your defense is, it will highly likely fail?
And if its the sphere as a contingency that bothers you why not contingent a dimension door or maybe levitate when you are a melee fighter or mirror image is already pretty good in combination with the shield spell. I don't think many hits will land? At 11 you have a plus 9 with melee weapons if i am not mistaken and a normal wizard has 15+5 for shield makes it a 20. So its a bit below 50% now we introduce mirror image and I have a 75% chance to let you attack my mirror image. Would lead the first blow to be at 1/8? which then increases if you destroy my mirror images and you can attack max 6 times with action surge. Even that is not so bad?
I think we are not talking the same thing i guess? Cause based on my perspective i specifliy said that this archer wich lost in ranged combat against the wizard is only an archer while the wizard is a Wizard and can do 100 other things with his magic what the archer can not.
Only if they lose; you're being very favourable towards casters while being unfavourable towards anything else because casters being superior is the conclusion that you're determined to draw so you're ignoring things that don't support that view.
This is common in all such discussions, but you end up assuming an ideal set of circumstances that will almost never actually play out in practice; while casters in theory could have an answer to everything, in reality this is less often the case as you've got spell choice pressures, action economy pressures, resource pressures and preparation pressures that all add up to make being a full caster more challenging than you seem to want to admit.
only if they loose? See that's my point two. I would agree with you when you did teh calculation yourself and came to another result. Maybe i did an error in my calculation. Thats always possible, but just saying its not true what i calculate is pretty pointless wouldn't you agree? I build the best archer fihger i know which was sharpshooter archery style and using a familiar for advantage, further i made the check exactly at level 11, where the fighter gets his third attakc, so that is the most favorable place to check this and the fighter lost even withouth applying to hit by -40%, by applying to hit that would probalby more like -60% under the damage of the nuclear wizard? If you have a better fighter build that does more damage please be my guest? But that gap was huge? And the job of an archer and a wizard who cast magic missle is pretty simple in every scneario possible. They shoot stuff from a far?
you would probably combo misty step and then toll the dead to get out of range
How? Misty Step only moves you 30 feet, your average martial can close that gap back to hitting you range. If you mean to remain at range then you're not describing a melee fight, and even then your opponent has the option of dashing towards you to either close the distance or force you to burn through spells faster.
How i escape with misty step? I misty step and dash. As my favorit race is Tabaxi and i would like to win a race it would proably look like misty step for 30 feet and then an action to dash for 60 feet and then feline agility for other 60 feet? And if we try to make teh speed argument most casters can summon a mount and then we are at speeds that even a monk has problems keeping up withouth using a finite resource like in the case of the monk?
And also an archer is not good in melee combat? Probably worse than a Wizard doing toll the dead whihc you can do close quarter
Where do you get this idea? Fighters and Rangers are proficient in all weapons; they are extremely good in melee as well as at range, that's kind of the entire point of these classes. You mention using Toll the Dead as a fallback, but that only gives you a single chance to succeed or fail, if the target passes the save you do zero damage. Most martials meanwhile have at least two opportunities to hit and damage you; this is why Monks aren't as low damage as some people like to claim, because more attacks means more opportunities to hit, which means missing does less to affect your damage output.
Yes of course, but if we cant agree that a fighter who is speced for ranged combat and has no feat a martial fighter would take and you call that good in melee combat we can end this discussion? Than its a waste of time? Cause that of course is the underlying asuption that good means you specialise in that. Punching something for 1-4 D8+DEX is not considered good. And also in the tank regard wil a ranged fighter have problems cause he either wastes a turn to get his shild or fight with an AC of 17? Which for example my Wizard diped artificer surpasses or if i just cast shield as a normal wizard.
This was for a hypothetical PVP fight i have never seen in DND which i think was your point saying that a fighter/roge/ monk could win cause they strike first:
case 1: I go first. I cast dominate person/monster or polymorph and use my portent that le me succed on my spell.
This is what I'm talking about; you're assuming the perfect ideal circumstances for your caster in every case. This isn't something that all casters can do, it's something that one very specific build of caster can do, and only if they rolled the way they needed to at the start of the day, and only if your opponent hasn't got another way to save (if a Fighter saves first time and you use a portent dice, then they could use Indomitable to roll again for example). Either you assume ideal circumstances for both opponents, or you're just choosing only the circumstances that support the outcome you want.
Even if you do manage to succeed on Hold Person, they get to save again in their turn to end it, at which point you're one portent dice down and if you want to hold them again that's another turn and another spell slot to do-so. Even with Polymorph, what are you going to do then? You can't damage them or they'll just come back, and it's not really a free hit in such a case as while you might deal excess damage, you could have dealt more by not giving them an extra buffer of hit-points. There are some options but it's again assuming a lot of ideal circumstances and everything going your way, as even if being polymorphed reduces a target's saves, they can still pass them.
Thats exactly why hold person is a horrible spell that nobody says you should take. I said dominate person. Which makes you my slaves for 1 hours no save afterwards unless i punch you. Then we teleport to a vulcano and i shove you into the vulcano or let you jump? Or i transform you into a a fish scoup you up and i cast water breathing and put you on the bottom of the ocean, or tranform you into a worm, use move earth to make a deep whole put the worm there and put the earth back.... Sorry thats about the most creative that i came up with in 5 min.
shit i think I deleted my other points... i post it like it is now. Maybe i rewrite the rest again later...
In short in this PVP scenario you build i play my favorit combination Tabaxi Artificer 1/Diviner x (Btw not that this is a good combo i just like Tabaxi cause i played like 300 hours Skyrim as a Khajit Conjurer Mage. :)). That means most of the time I will pass any save cause i can decided the save and the same for telecinetic if the roll is important enough i would even "waste" it on your strengh check. And because our fight has max two rounds i can use all portents at once. :)
Regarding the rope quesiton. What do you think will i make the rope 60 feet where i need 4 turn to reach it or exactly as high that i can come down and attack? As a tabaxi i can even leave it a bit longer the usual. And RAW i could put my hand and head through that portal and attack you from safely from there which again probably most DM's rule against it. :)
Paladins: My point was the best fighter build I know polearmmaster sentinel, which a paladin is even better at it cause he can smite which i consider magic as it uses spell slots? And yes the paladin is probably the 3rd best class in the game? maybe 4rth? Cleric is probably better especailly at Tier 3 and Tier 4.
Conclusion:
I see how you theorized to stop my rope trick that you have a devious mind and probably as well intersting ideas to solve problems. :) And regarding our fake PVP duell i would argue we leave it at that and if somebody ever can test it out we come back and show our results? looking forward to hear it? :)
Contingency RAW could trigger the second you decide in your head to attack me?
Deciding to attack and actually doing it are two different things 😉
I decide to attack you and then don't actually do it, then you've suddenly triggered a resilient sphere of no benefit to you. This is always the conumdrum with reaction timing (and applies to Ready as well) as the more guarantee you have of an attack actually taking place, the more likely it is that you're hit before the contingency can trigger. And the same works in reverse, except that your opponent has an extremely easy counter-trigger; they can prepare whatever they like to occur the moment your resilient sphere goes down.
In Fantasy there is a saying a Wizard can beat anybody as long as they are prepared and when i would prepare for PVP against a fighter i know what he can do and would prepare for all that.
The problem is that you're only assuming that the Wizard gets to do that (once again, you're favouring the Wizard to get the outcome you want); if you give the Fighter the same freedom to prepare, and a budget corresponding to your 1,500 gp outlay for a single use of Contingency then they can come to the fight pretty tooled up themselves. For that kind of money you could purchase magic items if they're available, and/or get a load of the potions and poisons Crawler Mucus (Contact), Drow Poison (Injury) and Essence of Ether (Inhaled) are all unpleasant for a caster to get hit by.
But you're again ignoring that even the best plan can fail; you seem to keep ignoring this. If you need your opponent to fail a save for your plan to work, and they instead succeed, what then? Only certain casters have options for that, and even those aren't infallible. You can't just assume ideal conditions and everything always going your way.
if its the sphere as a contingency that bothers you why not contingent a dimension door or maybe levitate when you are a melee fighter or mirror image is already pretty good in combination with the shield spell.
It's not the sphere specifically that's the problem, it's your assumption that it's an automatic counter with no drawbacks; Dimension Door is no more effective because your opponent can still ready an action for when you come back into range. Mirror Image is always a handy spell, but every hit that doesn't resolve against you is an image destroyed, and if you combine it with shield you're burning additional spells, depleting resources faster, and probably only giving you an AC that's no better than the fighter's is without magic. A single action surge could brute force through that in a single turn to start delivering damage (and poison, and potentially other effects).
the job of an archer and a wizard who cast magic missle is pretty simple in every scneario possible. They shoot stuff from a far?
And enemies just stand there and take your damage, right? If enemies get into melee range, your archer is still a strong melee fighter, likely with high AC and hit points; a wizard being able to potentially do more damage by burning spells is again choosing to favour them in an ideal scenario while ignoring anything that doesn't fit the conclusion you want to make.
How i escape with misty step? I misty step and dash. As my favorit race is Tabaxi and i would like to win a race it would proably look like misty step for 30 feet and then an action to dash for 60 feet and then feline agility for other 60 feet?
And the Fighter just starts shooting you at range again. I'm not even sure what you were trying to argue in the first place here? If your goal is to win against a Fighter then running away won't defeat them; and yet again (for what now feels like the thousandth time) you're intentionally giving the caster advantages so you can "win"; so what if you're a Tabaxi? So is the fighter, now they have the exact same speed you do unless you burn through your limited spell slots to go faster, and when you run out? You've still got an angry fighter after you who isn't going to let you sleep for eight hours to get those spells back.
Punching something for 1-4 D8+DEX is not considered good.
So now your optimal fighter build suddenly only has a bow or his fists? I'm not wasting anymore time on this.
Look, it's great that you enjoy playing as a caster, I've played multiple caster characters and had a blast with them too, but I'm also all too aware of their limitations, and have butted up against them many times. But you're ignoring their drawbacks entirely, while going out of your way to stack all odds in favour of the conclusion you're determined to make.
Casters have drawbacks and limitations, pretending otherwise and ignoring anyone who disagrees doesn't make it not true.
Yes i agree we dont seem to sepak the same language. I am as well confused by your aguments. :)
as i understood our discussion we had a theorstical fight where you play the fighter and i play the wizard, so why would i not try to find ways to best you? finding a way to beat my save or suck spell mixed with portent which autwins me the game would have been your job or did i understand that wrong? I would have epxtected lucky or anything like it cause i have no clue how lucky and portent interact for example. But your arguemnt is always you ready an action (as if i am afraid of that) and that i waste resources which is not even true contingency i prepared up to 10 days ago and has not cost me single spell slot. And again our fight goes two rounds max or probably even only one cause my dex is 14 and yours lower if you are a strngh fighter, so i dont have to save spells? I could make a firework woth fireballs after you a a snale are in my bag? What does a non diviner do. Depends on the subclass but probably animate object or summon greater demon and then try to land a suck or save spell. I just pick a save you are not proficent if i have something. Unless there is a martial feature that blocks save or suck spells i dont see any chance that this outcome is not mine unless the wizard gets bad rng which in the case of the diviner would be 2-3 bad (resp. Good cause we want at least one bad roll for a forced fail) portents and then when casting the spell fails as well? We could caluclat how often that happens but that would probably be low?
i would even argue you could highly likely have found a case in pve where a fighter can do something a wizard cant. Like even a drinking contest or a punching contest or whatever but your weird focus on PVP think does not help your case.
maybe i just dont understand you cause you have probably figuredd out that this is not my native language. :) hopfeully a third party can explain me your point.
i think i got one point. You think i just pick spells that i want and have not prepared? No this are my standard choices. The only dmaage spell i take is fireball and magic missle at Tier 1, esle i only take such stuff cause how effective it is. The sorcerer can trhow lighntjng bolt or such damage spells. I concentrate on taking out big guys or slow small threats. Which of course would make my spell choices good in a duell. and i think i got a second point you agrue my wizard cant take every role in the game? Yes of course but that is not the conclusion from my statement 4 players are better then one. I just argeu that 4 spellcasters are better then 4 non spellcasters (or 1 and 3, 2 and 2...). And since the newest cleric subclasses are out that let you share damage and heal temporary HP to everybody which is highly likely more heal than damage taken leaving your hp untouched. 🤣 i think its hard to argue against not ahving this two subclasses in your party? But i agree a totem barbarian would probably make this group even better then a moon druid mono class. If we multiclass i probably could solve that somehow, but that would be a Point for you? And please dont say again that is only sitatuanional. This is a method to make a party almost invincible fueld by short rests? I would argue that is usefull 99% of the time?
CaitSith. You said the spellcasters beats the rogue 99.9% of the time for the infiltration and such scenarios.
My counterpoint: the campaigns are either too low level for people to be Scry-proof, have counter measures vs divination, use detect magic, see invisibility, or use anti magic fields. OR the DM is being too nice to have some of those done.
Additionally: The rogue (depending on subclass) can go in and “easily” dispatch single targets without causing an alarm or alerting people (easier for some subs than others). This is not something done by the familiar. Or a divination spell.
and lastly: the rogue, after dispatching someone. Can hide the body, dress up in their clothes and (depending on subclass) And imitate the victim. Which can even enable them to just let the rest of the party waltz in.
————————————————————
caitsith you then said this is something you see talked about frequently by (and I am paraphrasing here) professional D&D people.
I would say that these professionals have become a bit used to one trick pony tactics and such, and don’t think creatively enough, and as DMs have become set in their specific ways and patterns. That they are not constantly seeking to grow and develop.
I personally, will rarely stay, or run, a campaign, where the same thing will work, each time, over the course of an entire campaign.
example: level 3 Gloomstalkers get umbral sight. Would you seriously expect if you were on a nightly basis tearing through an orc camp with him that the Orcs, who rely on dark vision, would NEVER light a torch at some point. All of a sudden see this idiot ranger covered who they failed to find?
if your answer to the above is anything like “punishing players” then you are severely ignoring the intelligence stat block of anything that’s not a PC, or even PCs too, and doing a disservice to those playing.
1) Sure that is a subjective view, but as soon as a world has powerful magic which is the case in a lot of fantasy settings I argue the authors should take into account what that means for a world. Like nobody would build castles, when there are dragons. Or when people can become invisble they could rob any rich person blind. So any spellcaster will be in a huge advantage which would lead to normal people kill all gifted people when they are children (Salem and co) or the magical people take over? Imagine you are an enchanter Wizard and morally neutral to evil and work closly for the king what would probably happen...
The same is a bit with DND. In the beginnig the martials have the advantage cause they are tankier and are not that resource intensive, but in 5e all caster have cantrips which are not far worse then weapon damage and the warlock can even enhance that to at least featless figher levlel damage. Not to mention moon druid. a Moon druid has multiatack at 2nd level and more HP than a barbarian. That subclass wins the early games while being a full caster and a healer while providing unlimited food for everybody (which kills any survival aspect). At level 5 with 3rd level spells most spellcaster become very strong and this continues until they are practically gods with wish and such spells.
And as said that is only if you play them relatively normal. I have seen so much crazy ideas like use move earth and dig a deep whole, use minor ilusion and let people fall for max falling damage. Use Shape water to throw bolders on enemy or create ice spices in pits. This you can do at level 1. Or rope trick hide in rope trick get out shout and get back. You are practically invicible. Or Magic mouths that warn you when there are invisible enemies enter 30 feet range...
So my solution which is probably very unpopular :) would be to make all adventurers mages. Make the EK spells a base feature of the Fighter and the same for the Rogue. Make them 3/4 casters by default and maybe make the AT and EK class makes them half casters.
So you want everyone to be a mage...
and yet in this world... no one ever uses dispel magic, detect magic, anti magic field, or anything like that?
as to the dragons and castle example. A castle provides a lot more protection against a dragon than does a village, or a forest, or a thatched hut, or a hammock, or a wagon....i literally struggle to see where you’re going with that.
as to your “invisible people” can rob a rich person blind. You don’t get rich by being an idiot. If anyone can turn invisible and rob you blind. That is 100% easier to stop (see alarm spell). Than it is to stop a skilled burglar (rogues) who know what kind of countermeasures people use. And who outperforms the DCs of all such things.
how is your spellcasters opening the locked chest? Knock? That’s quite loud. Putting it in a pocket dimension for later? Was it warded with a spell to prevent that? Did you check?
you make a lot of 1 way assumptions. When if you are going to make them and throw them out there. Need to be the same assumptions for both sides.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blank
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Cathsith21 posted some interesting observations about D&D. Some of them are relevant to spellcasting classes. I thought they could be discussed here.
Sure? Lets do that but i dont know what the topic would be? I agree i discussed pretty broadly but most of the time (at least i thought) i tried to answer points from other people who queoted me? I should probably have used quotes myself...
1) one point was probably that magic can do all that non mages can do but better which weirdly i think nobody ever disagreed with me before?
2) how can there a be a conflict of views in something that is pretty easy to calculate or guess? Either something is good or bad. If that is important is of course up to each one but if it is good or bad is most of thr time deductable and very easy id argue?
3) why would you cast healing word on a person that is not down or is down and will woth 99% likelyhood go down again before his turn will come? Thats why i came here my most hated combo vicious mockery and healing word. :)
that would probably be a summary of my rhoughts? :)
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
Thank you very much.
1) Sure that is a subjective view, but as soon as a world has powerful magic which is the case in a lot of fantasy settings I argue the authors should take into account what that means for a world. Like nobody would build castles, when there are dragons. Or when people can become invisble they could rob any rich person blind. So any spellcaster will be in a huge advantage which would lead to normal people kill all gifted people when they are children (Salem and co) or the magical people take over? Imagine you are an enchanter Wizard and morally neutral to evil and work closly for the king what would probably happen...
The same is a bit with DND. In the beginnig the martials have the advantage cause they are tankier and are not that resource intensive, but in 5e all caster have cantrips which are not far worse then weapon damage and the warlock can even enhance that to at least featless figher levlel damage. Not to mention moon druid. a Moon druid has multiatack at 2nd level and more HP than a barbarian. That subclass wins the early games while being a full caster and a healer while providing unlimited food for everybody (which kills any survival aspect). At level 5 with 3rd level spells most spellcaster become very strong and this continues until they are practically gods with wish and such spells.
And as said that is only if you play them relatively normal. I have seen so much crazy ideas like use move earth and dig a deep whole, use minor ilusion and let people fall for max falling damage. Use Shape water to throw bolders on enemy or create ice spices in pits. This you can do at level 1. Or rope trick hide in rope trick get out shout and get back. You are practically invicible. Or Magic mouths that warn you when there are invisible enemies enter 30 feet range...
So my solution which is probably very unpopular :) would be to make all adventurers mages. Make the EK spells a base feature of the Fighter and the same for the Rogue. Make them 3/4 casters by default and maybe make the AT and EK class makes them half casters.
2) To guess success or damage you only need like two calculations:
Take for example AC lets say 16 and deduct your to hit lets say 5. Which is now a 11. Meaning an 11-20 will end in a hit and a 1-10 will end in a not hit. That is 50%.
When a hit die is a D10 you just take 1+10 and divide it by 2 and have average damage. 5.5 in this case.
If combine this two and inlcude 1.05 for crits you already have the way you calculate damage for your build. I would argue that is extremly easy.
Why would sombody care for that?
When you attack an enemy with high AC and your to hit would be pretty low and you have a cantrip that forces a saving throw that should lead you to use that cantrip. Or maybe you have a roge in the party and your turn is then maybe better spend to give the rogue advantage instead of trying to do minor damage with very unlikely chances of success.
The quesiton now is of course is that even necessary? Does your DM even try to actually hurt you? If the fights are anyway completly easy and the DM does his best to run into your format the best way possible for you and does not attack downed player why bother. Esle this stuff just increases your effectiveness cause DND is a probability game like poker and there is a reason this game is mostly played by mathematicians and former chess players in the long run. And i expect even roleplaying is more fun when you are the guy who helped to defeat the Vampire lord and not the guy who did not hit once in the fight and then rolled death saves the rest of the game?
And based on the calcuations above i would wish that when people argue something is good, that they actually shortly checked if it is good and if they have checked it they could shortly provide that as prof. Like you do in the real world. I don't know how your job works, but you can't go to your boss and say lets do A cause its the best. Why is it the best? Cause i said so. Thats how dicussions on the internet often go, which i would argue is a waste of time cause like this no side will change their mind cuase there have not been shown any reason why the should change their mind?
Well, we could discuss the potential social realities of magic using people at length and not get very far. But as a counter to your argument that "gifted people" would be killed as children, remember that if some societies didn't kill theirs then your team has none and they have plenty of this resource that you describe as fearsome.
Your thesis (1) is that magic using PCs are much greater powered than non-magic using classes, right?
I think that this statement depends on how the player plays the PC and how the DM structures the campaign. The classic balancing point for this is a campaign 'day' that involves multiple combats as the normal practice. When this happens, the 'full-casters' must conserve and ration their spell slots since they are restored on a long rest. When you have to ration spell slots, a magic user isn't going to jump in and act like the rogue to steal something unless that appears to be the best play for the whole party and the spell slots necessary are part of that assessment.
Second point is that even if a spell caster is better at one thing, he is unlikely to be better at everything. I rarely see a spellcaster that can effectively tank, for example, although a Wall of Stone isn't bad. However, this only delays the battle, in case your intent was to win instead of escape.
During half of the combat encounters, your magic user is going to be counteracting the enemy spell caster. As a result your fellow PCs are going to need to use their features to deal with the other parts of the battlefield.
At this point, I don't see magic users as the omnipotent battlefield force. They can certainly be that for one round, or two or three, but they can't keep it up if the battle becomes long. Maybe I just haven't reached the top levels to see the final terror a spell caster can throw down. But as a Bard, I'm not sure my spell list is going to be all that damage focused.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
Most of you say what keeps them in check is the lengh of the day. What I agree on concept, but I would say as long as you only use spell slots when it really counts and don't throw fireballs at normal encounters you should be more then fine? if you take for example tomb of ahinilaiton. In the jungle you had two encounters a day and you are like 7-10. I don't have enough turns to use all my spells in that scenario. And ascent of avernus was stupid difficult but most of the time it was one encounter a day. I mean what is brutal is Mad mage cause if you can only rest after 16 hours. You have like 12 ecounters untill finally a day is over and you can take a long rest, which was not fun for any class and ended up in a lot of sneaking and then backtracking for 2 hours to rest in teh tavern.
And final point about resources lets take Warlock and Bladesinger. Warlock can shoot eldrich blast and hex (needs only a short rest) up to four times a round for ever (1-4 times 1D10+5+1D6). Thats better then a fighter with a greatsword or an archer withouth a feat. Also the Bladesinger can attack once with a Bow and then use his second attack for a cantrip (1D8+DEX modifier +1-4 times a D12 for toll the dead) which beats most fighters also in standard damgae. And the Bladesinger is even a full caster. Funny enough he is best played as a ranged fighter. :)
And regarding the tank. I don't know if you know the Hedgehog Wizard. Thats 1 Hexblade/x Abjuration wizard. The armor of agethys charges the ward and the ward prevents the armor of agethyes to decrease. So first of all the Wizard has a ton of HP and even does damage to everybody attacking it. And no my obligatory statement :) while being a full caster.
Regarding damage there is always teh nuclear Wizard which goes Hexblood/ x evocation wizard and only casts magic missle that do an absurd amounts of damage with no chance to fail (1D4+1+5 (Evocation)+6(Hexblad curse)) times missle which is 11 in case of a 9th level spell. :)
or the tempest cleric 2/ x scribe wizard where you can do max lightning damge i think twice a short rest. (Change the damage typ to lighnting and use channel divnity for each damage spell).
I follow one youtuber. Professor Dungeon Master (i think its the name). He is pretty old school and constantly complains that in the past Wizards started almost useless and then became very powerful if you survived this long. And now in 5e the cantrips makes spellcasters almost as good as fighters. I would not argue thats a bad thing but aparently thats something new in 5e and in the past spellcasters had to use weapons badly when they were out of spells. Which i remember from Baldurs Gate 1+2. My wizard threw a lot of stones with his sling and almost never hit with it.
Regarding hihg level spells. My favorit class is Wizard, but a Bard could take the spells as secrets, but a lot of the strengh of the spells are related to the correct subclass. It depens what you count but it starts already at 4th level ->Polymorph (Buff allies or take out enemies and transform them into a snale (Diviner), Banish (Diviner or Abjurer) and Arcane eye (Diviner almost free), 5th level->animate Object (Average damage 65 per round, non magical but it take that any time) and Wall of force (The reason Napeolon won eventhough his army in total was smaller divide and conquer), 6th Contingency (freedom of movement or dimension door or the spere i forgot the name) and Mass suggestion, 7th Forecage (no concentration required! Keep the bars far apart that you can attack it, no saving throw thus no legendary resistance) and simulacrum which gives you a second you or a dragon if you can catch one or can convince to copy him, clone that makes your party imortal, 8th level maze where they need to succed on a intenlligence save to get out which almost nobody is good or Dominate Monster (Enchanter or Divnier) and demi plane where you store your clones and a copy of your spellbook 9th level Wish cast any spell that exists and if you did not use it on that day just use it for a free simulacrum of you. Now oyu have two levle 17-20 wizards with all their spell slots. Or everybodies favorit use simulacrum on you while you have your 9th level slot and cast wish to cast simulacrum the new simulacrum now casts wish resp. simulacrum. My i introduce you to my armee of level 20 wizards. :)
That was only Wizard. I mean the aura of clerics spirit guardians is extremly powerful and a good magical secret.
Being able to do similar damage to a Fighter doesn't make them equivalent unless you ignore everything else; first of all, if you're comparing ranged damage, the Fighter can take the Archery fighting style, meaning they miss less than the Warlock does. Second, the Fighter will have higher HP and AC, a free self-heal and action surge for dealing more damage in a single turn. In a contest between a Fighter and a Warlock I don't think I'd bet on the Warlock at early levels, and even at higher levels it's about how exactly they're built, what spells they have for their limited pact magic slots, and whether the Fighter saves against them.
While druids are durable for casters, they're still not as durable as a Barbarian as HP is only part of the equation; a properly built Barbarian should have a better AC than most (all?) wildshape options the druid has for the same level, and the Barbarian will also have physical damage resistance, so a druid's extra HP from wild-shape can be burned through quickly. While multi-attack does give Circle of the Moon quite high damage at lower levels, that falls off over time, especially as you can gain no benefit from magic weapons.
That's not to say that a druid can't compete if that's the role you want to fill in a group, but the Barbarian is strong at tanking without any extra effort, and in most cases is still more durable in practice, and more importantly better at tanking which is what you usually want durability for anyway; tanking is more than just being able to take damage, it's about encouraging enemies to focus on you, which Barbarians can do for free with Reckless Attack (while dealing extra damage).
While spell creativity can be fun, a non-magical group can still set traps. You're also ignoring that enemies can see through Minor Illusion, in which case it only takes one to spot it and warn the others, and you've wasted a spell, which you're now going to miss when you're thrown into combat. It's down to a DM how easy such tricks are to pull off; if a caster is abusing magic to avoid fights entirely, and the rest of the group aren't happy with that, then a good DM can and should push back.
Part of the problem here is you're looking at classes far too situationally; a trap only works if you can set it up in advance, but by the same token a Fighter getting the drop on a caster could shove them prone then grapple with action surge (or extra attack, depending on level), which I think most DMs would agree would prevent most casting (if you're face down in the mud then speaking isn't easy, and someone pinning you to the ground isn't just going to let you freely move your arms for somatic or material components). At this point most casters are helpless, and the fighter can just headbutt them to death with advantage. A Rogue at early levels could one-shot a caster or have them near death with one good hit (then [action]hide[/action) while a Monk doesn't necessarily need the element of surprise to run up and punch a caster 3-4 times in the throat (and at higher levels the Monk can brute force Stunning Strike on a caster fairly easily, and only needs to succeed once to stun lock for them several rounds while dealing damage the entire time).
For everything there's a counter, and while casters can have more than most in a single package, nothing is guaranteed and nothing is without a countermeasure of its own; most casters on their own are one bad roll away from being in trouble, as a bad roll can mean an attack spell misses and does nothing, or an enemy saves and ignores your control spell, sees through your illusion and so-on. Casters are at their most powerful when they're part of a group, as that's what allows them to focus on doing one thing, while protecting them from the other things they can't simultaneously defend against otherwise. There's a reason that royal mages may have knights to protect them as they cast, liches will have undead minions to keep heroes at bay etc.
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
Sorry I am aprantely to stupid to quote in this forum. :)
1st quote) Fighter vs Warlock. Yes I discussed it in the previous thread and i agree i left it out. Fighters can be much better than a warlock, but have to be build "good" while even a player on his first DND can play a warlock that only shoots eldrich blast and casts hex. No thought required in playing and not much strategie involved in building. I admit a sentinel/polearm master or a sharp shooter fighter can be extremly usefull. Which i said in the previous posts but forgot here. But a Paladin with sentinel/polearm master is even a better combo and this is cause he is a half caster. What i agree the best archer in teh game is probably a Fighter, but even then we would need to pair it against the nuclear wizard. Don't know how it would end up. And that fighter is than only good at ranged damage and not much else. Wheres the nuclear wizard is still a wizard.
Lets say level 11 and like 10 rounds? Nuclear Wizard does 71.3 damage on average and (max 15 rounds until he needs arcane recovery or a long rest). While the fighter would be 64.4 damage on average (inlcuding action surge) but with a +2 (archery style)-5 penalty to hit for sharpshooter. So if we include to hit, we have a huge gap. That would close somewhere after may round 30 or so? But i don't think at that stage there is much left to fight? And I took level 11 cause the fighter gets his third attack. So i guess the higher we got the bigger the gap and the longer the wizard can shoot at maximal capacity?
And regarding HP I could imagine that hedgehog wizard (see above) is probably a contantatn for best Tank in 5e? could be wrong never a role I really cared to fill.
2nd quote) Yes i agree a moon druid is good for 1-4 levels and then you are a full caster cause of the issue with AC and HP. I just meant with this the fighters dont even dominate full caster in the level 1-4 where for example wizards are not that powerful. I would probably not play a moon druid where it goes over Tier 1.
EDIT: DND Powergamers tactic room just brought out a video Earthsinger - Moon Durid 9/ Bladesinger 11 on youtube. XD Mix The best Tier 1 combo with one of the best Tier 2 - Tier 3. His words not mine. To the best of my knowledge he never mentioned Druids before. :) I would say thats an example what sombody creative can do with DND? I would argue thats pretty hard for any non magical martial multiclass to beat? I mean aside from Social that build can do a lot of things extremly well?
3rd quote) PVP fight it depends on the level but in a pvp case i would prepare contingency resilients sphere when i am about to be hit trigger it, which makes me unreachable for a non spellcaster. Then its my trun and then you are dead, my slave or a snale (Diviner Wizard unless he is really unlucky with his portents). In such a rare case i teleport away and prepare and come back when you expect it the least. ;)
In PVE i have dimension door as contingency and just let me teleport away. Also a spell scroll with misty step solves teh whole not being able to use your mouth problem like silence. and when you argue a grappeld wizard could not even wave his arms how do grappeld oppennts beat you with their swords if the caster can move his hands? Thats a bit harsh houseruling but nevertheless for such emergencies you have spellscrolls or the metamagic feat. What i have heard some people do who think aparantly as well that spell casting is to strong they let you role to succed at a spell. An arcana check. I don't know if i like that or not. But i played a game Dungeon of nehubalak and they had that feature and natural 1s on a spell were always hilarious. And as compensation spells could crit and were like cast one level higher.
Thats actually not how minor ilussion works but of course if the DM says its otherwise it is otherwise. :) It would need first of to spot it during an attack which is already huge metagaming of the DM and then he would need to take an action and make an investigation check and succed that the ilusion is not real for him. But I agree thats working once in a campaign but that was an example of a cantrip. With leveled spell you can do a lot more shanigans. But thats the best thing you can do when you are a spellcaster and at that level where a good sneeze can kill even a barbarian. :)
Just click Quote in the bottom right of the post you want; if you want to respond to multiple different parts (as I usually do) then the easiest way is to hit Quote, trim it down to just the bit you want, respond to that, then hit quote again and trim for the next part and so-on.
Again the problem with the way you're looking at it is that you're only focusing on one thing; in a ranged slugging contest where you just stand still at range and hit each other then without any other considerations a caster will probably win, but the reverse can be true if you just stand in melee range and punch each other. This is pure white room theory-crafting as fights in D&D shouldn't just be an empty kill box where everybody just trades blows.
I wouldn't rely on such videos as they invariably have exactly the same problem; they go out of their way to theory craft everything in D&D as if raw damage is all that ever matters, it's not. I've watched a bunch of videos on YouTube for various classes, and they always fall into the same trap of trying to boil something down to some kind of single set of number, but the moment you do that you're excluding huge sections of the game entirely, to theorise about a situation that may never actually exist in a real game.
You could argue that spellcasters can be used to break the game most easily, but that doesn't necessarily make their classes stronger as while coming up with the most broken builds might be an amusing though exercise, it doesn't make a bit of a difference if your DM won't let you play them, or pushes back to nerf or bypass whatever's broken about them. One key thing about D&D is that it's driven by a DM; in practice no class is weak or strong with a good DM, as they'll adjust to balance things out so every player gets equal chance to do their thing.
There are quite a few caveats with this plan:
Spells bound to scrolls still require vocal or somatic components if the original spell does ‐ they're only exempted from material components.
A normal standing grapple just reduces a target's speed to 0 at a cost of one hand for the grappler, so both can still act normally with no other conditions. But nothing in the rules says you can't grapple by grabbing a target's arm, wrist or hand, or that you can't seek to use both hands if you want to, it's up to your DM.
The specific example I gave though is pinning a target, which you do by knocking them prone then grappled (or vice versa) which pins an opponent such that they can't get up at all without breaking your grapple first. It's hard to imagine many situations where being pinned in this way leaves you able to freely move your arms in the exact way that you need to in order to cast a spell.
Granted it's an area in D&D that's poorly specified, as spells don't actually say what hand or arm movement is required; but "free use of one hand" can easily be argued to mean a caster must be able to take unrestricted movements with their hand such as drawing a sigil in the air (i.e- it's more than just being able to twitch a finger otherwise it's a pointless feature).
I'm not sure what kind of barbarians you're referring to, but the gap between a caster and barbarian's hitpoints grow extremely rapidly, especially when you account for resistances. While there are spells that could render a barbarian harmless for a few rounds (again though, it usually only takes one save to ruin that plan), there are none that should be able to kill one outright even at 9th level, as by the time you get a 9th level spell your average Barbarian is pushing well over 200 hitpoints.
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
I believe they said it was linked by a Contingency spell, not as a readied action.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
This was related to saying at level 1 or 2 you can't do much and you die pretty fast, but taht is for all classes at level 2 and especially level 1.
I think we are not talking the same thing i guess? Cause based on my perspective i specifliy said that this archer wich lost in ranged combat against the wizard is only an archer while the wizard is a Wizard and can do 100 other things with his magic what the archer can not. And also an archer is not good in melee combat? Probably worse than a Wizard doing toll the dead whihc you can do close quarter, but you would probably combo misty step and then toll the dead to get out of range. And as somebody who played the mage in every game that lets you play one or even close i agree standing far enough back is a skill that a mage must need to learn or else he gets mocked and reseructed pretty often or i have just mean friends. :). I quote now rpgbot when you get hit as a wizard you have other problems. Which i find a bit bold but still funny. :) And wizard has a lot defensive options like Mirror Image and Mage Armor and Shield give like 20-21 AC so, not bad either for the beginning. Not to metion a Abjurer or Bladedancer.
And regarding the builds i would never play a nuclear Wizard. That is boring as hell. But the Hedgehog sounds fun to be honest and i will maybe try some day. Be a Wizard and extremly tanky? If that is not funny and you finally can use war caster the part where people flee from you which usally does not happen as a wizard. :)
No its the other way around i like to discuss such things and that are the only people that like to discuss such things as well. I was once in a forum in FB and there i completly agree with you. I left the forum cause i had a discussion with somebody completly overestimating animate dead. I gave him like 30 examples why he can't just expect teh max number of undead unchecked. (we called that withe room blabla) And like 5 people were attacking me for giving him advice. Which i found a bit confusing and decided to leave that group. But in youtube the other comments are usually the same direction as my own and Treantmonk and DND tactic rooms often dicuss their video with their viewers what i like.
Regarding this video. I can highly recommend the creator cause this guy is throughly like i have not seen somebody doing it for a hobby. I found him when i was frustrated on the scribe wizard cause i hated it and everybody said how great it is. He said as well that the subclass was meh but showed how he would use this features and i was like WTF this subclass is broken? I Funny enough he said in teh Moondruid/Bladesinger video something like the following: "damage is completly overated. I agree based on my stragegy its one of 7 principles but there are 6 ohters. Nevertheless I know most of you care for the damage thats why i show it in my build..." Further he even includes tactics for each level from 1-20. some of the time its cast darkness and shift as bonus action action as a blindsight creature and then attacks in the darkness spell. I would argue that is a pretty good tactic and not at all white room blabla? And the genius of this combination is that you use the defensive buffs a wizard gets and puts it on the shifted anamial which compensates all the negative parts of the moon druid. So I would argue thats a contender for one of the best builds i have ever seen?
Why would a DM ban that. He can just make the encounter a bit more dificult. And if the DM allows peace and twilight domains which i think i have not heard yet sombody ban, i would argue that nothing needs to be banned?
This was for a hypothetical PVP fight i have never seen in DND which i think was your point saying that a fighter/roge/ monk could win cause they strike first:
case 1: I go first. I cast dominate person/monster or polymorph and use my portent that le me succed on my spell. You are now bakring or kneeling. If we are lower level i cast rope trick climb up and take the rope with me wait your turn then climb down hurt you and climb up. repeat.
Case 2: You go first. you try to strike me which trigger my sphere (contingency as ophidimancer said thx :)) and ends your turn unless there is something within 15 feets you can use to destroy it. And yes contingency is a pretty common spell as you can prepare it beforehand. (10days duration). That is a must take at level 11 (i think). At low levels I have a magic mouth prepared that cries enemy when somebody with the intent of hurting me is within 30 feet. So you probably reach me, but at this level hopfully my mage armor shield combo helps me. Not to metion i have two portents (which don't need a reaction). After your turn see case 1.
I must admit this one i heard recently and found very clever but could not use myself yet. But i agree it looks like it would not help so back to metagmagic option feat for this scenario or in case i need to evade an enemy counter spell. :)
I mean i would agree that grappling is currently bad in its state and your suggestion makes absolutly sense for me. I mean in every adult fantasy book the fighters try to break the fingers of the casters. Still I can say that grapples would not be the end of me, cause it may be pretty specific but i my wizards all have telecinetic. I go Int 17 that i can take telecinetic at level 4 since tashas cause all the other caster feats are so boring. Its also great to shove people into AOEs or into blizzards or other hazards which are aparently wating behind every corner based on your PVP strategy. ;)
P.s. Thanks for the tip with quoting, but weird that this is so compalicated and we cant select the part we want to quote?
Attacking with a bow ends the bladesong, is that really a good idea? Seems better to go out of your way to make sure you're proficient with hand crossbows, since they won't end the bladesong.
I would argue the best way to play a bladesong is ignore the melee aspect of that subclass. Just use the baldesong defensivly and dont attack with the bow while its on. Also i think the wording even prohibits hand crossbow cause it must be a one handed melee attack i think? Else i a gree that would be the better choice and would wven slightly increase the damage.
edit: i cant find it in the class description. Would have sworn i have seen the discussion and the consensis was it would break baldesong, but i dont find it?
edit 2: the consenis was cause all the styles are described and cross bow was not among them. Also in song of victory it is stated a melee weapon attack. Surprised that was enough reason for me to ignore that option? But it would be expensive to get crossbow expertise unless you have it from your race? The best dip artificer has only in the UA hand crossbows. So you would need to start as a fighter and the are one level behind which i would argue is probably to expensive for on adding like 5.5 damage while bladesong is on per turn. Unless you also get archery style and con saves... i would argue depends on the lengh of the campaign. If its long the 1 level is probabl haunt you. If i had not started as a fighter i could cast now the spell xy, but if its only tier 2 would probably be not a big issue?
but thanks for the hint. :)
All bows are two-handed: You can use a bonus action to start the Bladesong, which lasts for 1 minute. It ends early if you are incapacitated, if you don medium or heavy armor or a shield, or if you use two hands to make an attack with a weapon. You can also dismiss the Bladesong at any time (no action required).
Starting with hand crossbow requires Drow if your GM is refusing the Tasha's rule for swapping out racial proficiencies - otherwise, several flavors of half-elf and elf can swap to it, or you can just use a sling, which is only 1 less damage on average, and you start proficient with it.
Song of Victory is the only melee-specific ability on Bladesingers, I think, but you're gonna die in a big hurry with Bladesong off. One arrow and one cantrip-or-arrow isn't going to murder your enemy before they close the distance and start asking you deep, personal questions, and if you use neither Bladesong nor Extra Attack, you probably need to rethink your subclass choices.
There is a reddit discussion about this topic whihc i quoted. Cause i asked myself the same question if its ok or not and like all reddit discussion some people say yes and other not. I would say RAW you can, but RAI probably not. The sub class is called Bladsinger and in the fluff they even showed all different styles a Bladesinger would use. High indication for RAI. So i would argue its up to the DM, but I don't think it should be a problem to allow it. The damge is not that big withouth investment in shartshooter or cross bow expert and even then not comparable to a Fighter Archer.
You are right completly forgot that tashas lets you swap Weapon proficnecies. So the usual choice for bladesinger being a High elf could swad Swords for cross bow expert. Good point.
Does not help my usual race choices but for all the people that are not yet bored with the LOTR gang that is of course helpfull. :)
The old Bladesinger was considered bad cause it forced you into melee which as a wizard is rarely a good strategy. Further why on earth would a full caster waste his action to punch stuff with a stick or even worse are rsiking your precious concentration to break. The new subclass is considered one of the best Wizard Subclasses (not Diviner or Chronurgist level of course) but still very good. What is the main difference between the version, that you can replace a wepaon attack for a cantrip which substantionally increases your damage. And a blade singer is a Wizard so that is most of the time your job not to get caught by the enmies. But a Bladesinger has the possiblity to go bladesong in a tight space and has a higher chance of survival as an ilusionist because of his defensive powers. With this reasoning you should not play a wizard at all, cuase the enemey can just close to you and attack you?
Maybe we have a misunderstanding a Bladesinger would like a normal wizard (in an important battle, not an easy encounter of course) in Turn 1 maybe cast mirror image, rope trick or whatever defense you use, then use a concentration spell like hypnotic pattern, sleetstorm, slow or what is your cup of tea (or reverse if all enemies stand perfect in one place you start of course with hypnotic pattern) and then hold back and like every other wizard blast form a far cantrips. The only difference is that the bladesinger can attack also with a bow which is a slight increase in damage and when attacked can use his superior defense capabilites prevent constituion saving throws from happening? So this wizard has an extrem high chance of holding concnentration and controlling the battlefield (Divide) which lets the rest of the party do the conquering part. If that is not good i think we have substationally different philosophies in stragegy? If the austrian did not find a way to counter that trick we would all speak french now and would not measure spells in feet but in meters. ;)
The Abjurer has similiar defensive abilities cause the Ward hinders as well a forced saving throw, but has not the same advantage in damage and AC. Making it a bit better then the Abjurer i would argue. The same for War Wizard, but there i just find the features a bit boring eventhough they are good.
Regarding the chronurgist, he goes usually first which is huge for a controler and the 10th level abitlity lets you cast tiny hut as an action, which is a pretty usuefull buff being invicible when its not your turn. :) Or alternatively you can give your famliar a concentration spell and lets you use two concentration spells at the same time.
And Diviner can in most cases just decide if you fail a saving throw or not, which for example with dominate monster, polymorph or banishment is huge. Also he can scout out the whole dungeon or whatver almost for free.
Making this two the best based on my opinion and a lot of other people.
Okay, but all my other points still apply; the triggering condition still doesn't mean it automatically works before you take damage, and it isn't the instant invulnerability that people think it is, as you can be moved into harms way for when the spell drops, or your opponent can simply move to where you can't attack them and wait you out. In practice the only way I've actually seen it used in practice is as a panic button when you're in danger of being overwhelmed, as it can give you a chance to heal yourself, but you're pretty reliant on the rest of your party to actually make it work otherwise enemies can just toss you off a cliff (and technically it doesn't actually prevent fall damage, as the sphere itself is what you would be colliding with), or ready their actions and swarm you again the moment it drops.
Even at levels 1 and 2 your average Barbarian is still far more durable than your average caster; at those kind of levels the Barbarian already has Rage, while a caster only really has Blade Ward to compete (which means losing your ability to do anything else at those levels). Everyone is flimsier at those levels, but your average Barbarian is still a formidable tank by early level standards, your average Fighter will have a solid AC and so-on.
Only if they lose; you're being very favourable towards casters while being unfavourable towards anything else because casters being superior is the conclusion that you're determined to draw so you're ignoring things that don't support that view.
This is common in all such discussions, but you end up assuming an ideal set of circumstances that will almost never actually play out in practice; while casters in theory could have an answer to everything, in reality this is less often the case as you've got spell choice pressures, action economy pressures, resource pressures and preparation pressures that all add up to make being a full caster more challenging than you seem to want to admit.
Where do you get this idea? Fighters and Rangers are proficient in all weapons; they are extremely good in melee as well as at range, that's kind of the entire point of these classes. You mention using Toll the Dead as a fallback, but that only gives you a single chance to succeed or fail, if the target passes the save you do zero damage. Most martials meanwhile have at least two opportunities to hit and damage you; this is why Monks aren't as low damage as some people like to claim, because more attacks means more opportunities to hit, which means missing does less to affect your damage output.
How? Misty Step only moves you 30 feet, your average martial can close that gap back to hitting you range. If you mean to remain at range then you're not describing a melee fight, and even then your opponent has the option of dashing towards you to either close the distance or force you to burn through spells faster.
This is what I'm talking about; you're assuming the perfect ideal circumstances for your caster in every case. This isn't something that all casters can do, it's something that one very specific build of caster can do, and only if they rolled the way they needed to at the start of the day, and only if your opponent hasn't got another way to save (if a Fighter saves first time and you use a portent dice, then they could use Indomitable to roll again for example). Either you assume ideal circumstances for both opponents, or you're just choosing only the circumstances that support the outcome you want.
Even if you do manage to succeed on Hold Person, they get to save again in their turn to end it, at which point you're one portent dice down and if you want to hold them again that's another turn and another spell slot to do-so. Even with Polymorph, what are you going to do then? You can't damage them or they'll just come back, and it's not really a free hit in such a case as while you might deal excess damage, you could have dealt more by not giving them an extra buffer of hit-points. There are some options but it's again assuming a lot of ideal circumstances and everything going your way, as even if being polymorphed reduces a target's saves, they can still pass them.
Your opponent can simply ready their attacks and hit you as soon as you emerge, in which case you take just as much damage as normal.
They also have other options depending upon whether your rope trick is the full sixty feet in the air; the higher up rope trick is, the safer it is from interference (blocking the entrance or such) but you also have to actually climb that rope. If you put it at the full sixty feet then keep in mind you can only climb at half speed (and an enemy can climb after you or you knock you off it). If it's low enough (e.g- constrained by a ceiling) then they may be able to block it, or maybe hold a flame under it (the spell only states that attacks and spells can't pass through, it says nothing about good old mundane smoke 😈).
I love rope trick, but it's most useful when you can get inside it while out of view; e.g- run into a room, lock the door and while they're bashing it down hide in your own personal pocket dimension till they go away, turn their back or whatever.
Even with contigency this still isn't really an ideal plan, as your enemy doesn't need to destroy the sphere, they can simply wait it out. (it only lasts a minute) It's also worth noting that it's the caster whose movement speed is reduced, for anyone else they just need to be able to carry you to move normally, and your average high Strength martial should be able to do so, and even those that can't can still dash to move you further.
It's also not the only thing they can do at all; everyone can use the Ready action and simply wait for your sphere to drop before attacking you anyway. Resilient Sphere in practice only delays attacks, it doesn't prevent them unless you have a party to back you up.
There are still some limits even with metamagic (which is also a finite resource, espeically when taken as a feat) as you still may require material components (or access to your focus), which an opponent can also seek to prevent (or can try to disarm you of your focus using the Disarm rule in the Dungeon Master's Guide).
While you might be able to cast a spell with the right combination of circumstances it may still not be the one that helps you the most. And none of these is an answer to a Monk just running up and punching you in the throat with Stunning Strike; you only have to fail one constitution save (which only sorcerers get proficiency in as standard) and you're in the same theoretical predicament as anyone you manage to cast a Hold onto, except that a Monk has a much higher chance of success both initially and to maintain it, as all Monks can force up to four saves per turn, while simultaneously dealing damage (which only increases once the first stun succeed).
Actually my issue is less with grappling (which IMO works fine, you just need to combine it with something else to make the most of it), it's more that the somatic component description doesn't really clarify what "free use of one hand" means. It has to be more than just having a free hand, otherwise it'd be a largely pointless requirement for a spell, but there are no clear examples. Vocal components actually have the same; the rules don't really give examples of what's enough to prevent speech for casting, i.e- is a hand over the mouth enough, or is that only muffled rather than silenced?
In both cases it's largely down to your DM as a common sense case, so if someone is actively seeking to stop you from casting with a grapple, then it's reasonable to let that happen if they have a clear idea of how they're doing it (and how that restricts themselves in return, as a bear hug to pin arms for example means you can't use yours either).
A telekenetic shove requires a failed Strength save to work; your average martial is usually going to have this as one of their best saves; Barbarian, Fighters, Monks and Rangers all have proficiency as standard, and Barbarians have advantage while raging.
To try and summarise; my point isn't that casters aren't flexible, and can't in theory have an answer for most situations, but in practice it's not so simple. Casters have pressures that other classes simply don't have in terms of spell selection pressure, spell slot pressure, concentration, preparation and so-on, and a very large number of spells are all-or-nothing; they either work or they don't, and when they don't is when you're in trouble, as it can mean you've spent an entire turn doing essentially nothing.
Most martials by comparison can maintain a high level of performance no matter how long a dungeon crawl lasts, and perform well even when short rests aren't possible (if you have a stock of potions to cover healing), though Monks will suffer in that scenario.
One other argument you've made is that Palladins are better than other martials because they're half-casters, but you can actually flip that argument around; they're better than other casters because they're half-martial. When a Palladin runs out of spells, or finds themselves inside an anti-magic field, or wants to converse slots etc., they're still a formidable opponent without any spells at all thanks to high HP and AC, strong and reliable attacks with no resource cost etc.
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
Contingency RAW could trigger the second you decide in your head to attack me? Thats why most DM rule it otherwise. Cause it would give you omniscience about specific topics by triggering the contingency.
In Fantasy there is a saying a Wizard can beat anybody as long as they are prepared and when i would prepare for PVP against a fighter i know what he can do and would prepare for all that. for example i dip aritficer most of teh time with wizard and feather fall is one spell i have for such cases aready in my repertoir? Of course that does not work in a normal campaign as we don't konw what we face excactly. And if you stand there an ready an action you can do one attack, that first of all i could portent to not hit or maybe shield? What are the chances of hitting me and for what damage? even a wizard can take one great axe attack even a crit? But again have you ever experienced PVP in DND? I mean if you are an experienced PVP player I take your word for it, cause i have never seen it, but i have the feeling in one on one and nowing who i would fight I could probably beat most as a Divnier wizard of sufficent level? Cause of portent it does not matter how good your defense is, it will highly likely fail?
And if its the sphere as a contingency that bothers you why not contingent a dimension door or maybe levitate when you are a melee fighter or mirror image is already pretty good in combination with the shield spell. I don't think many hits will land? At 11 you have a plus 9 with melee weapons if i am not mistaken and a normal wizard has 15+5 for shield makes it a 20. So its a bit below 50% now we introduce mirror image and I have a 75% chance to let you attack my mirror image. Would lead the first blow to be at 1/8? which then increases if you destroy my mirror images and you can attack max 6 times with action surge. Even that is not so bad?
only if they loose? See that's my point two. I would agree with you when you did teh calculation yourself and came to another result. Maybe i did an error in my calculation. Thats always possible, but just saying its not true what i calculate is pretty pointless wouldn't you agree? I build the best archer fihger i know which was sharpshooter archery style and using a familiar for advantage, further i made the check exactly at level 11, where the fighter gets his third attakc, so that is the most favorable place to check this and the fighter lost even withouth applying to hit by -40%, by applying to hit that would probalby more like -60% under the damage of the nuclear wizard? If you have a better fighter build that does more damage please be my guest? But that gap was huge? And the job of an archer and a wizard who cast magic missle is pretty simple in every scneario possible. They shoot stuff from a far?
How i escape with misty step? I misty step and dash. As my favorit race is Tabaxi and i would like to win a race it would proably look like misty step for 30 feet and then an action to dash for 60 feet and then feline agility for other 60 feet? And if we try to make teh speed argument most casters can summon a mount and then we are at speeds that even a monk has problems keeping up withouth using a finite resource like in the case of the monk?
Yes of course, but if we cant agree that a fighter who is speced for ranged combat and has no feat a martial fighter would take and you call that good in melee combat we can end this discussion? Than its a waste of time? Cause that of course is the underlying asuption that good means you specialise in that. Punching something for 1-4 D8+DEX is not considered good. And also in the tank regard wil a ranged fighter have problems cause he either wastes a turn to get his shild or fight with an AC of 17? Which for example my Wizard diped artificer surpasses or if i just cast shield as a normal wizard.
Thats exactly why hold person is a horrible spell that nobody says you should take. I said dominate person. Which makes you my slaves for 1 hours no save afterwards unless i punch you. Then we teleport to a vulcano and i shove you into the vulcano or let you jump? Or i transform you into a a fish scoup you up and i cast water breathing and put you on the bottom of the ocean, or tranform you into a worm, use move earth to make a deep whole put the worm there and put the earth back.... Sorry thats about the most creative that i came up with in 5 min.
shit i think I deleted my other points... i post it like it is now. Maybe i rewrite the rest again later...
In short in this PVP scenario you build i play my favorit combination Tabaxi Artificer 1/Diviner x (Btw not that this is a good combo i just like Tabaxi cause i played like 300 hours Skyrim as a Khajit Conjurer Mage. :)). That means most of the time I will pass any save cause i can decided the save and the same for telecinetic if the roll is important enough i would even "waste" it on your strengh check. And because our fight has max two rounds i can use all portents at once. :)
Regarding the rope quesiton. What do you think will i make the rope 60 feet where i need 4 turn to reach it or exactly as high that i can come down and attack? As a tabaxi i can even leave it a bit longer the usual. And RAW i could put my hand and head through that portal and attack you from safely from there which again probably most DM's rule against it. :)
Paladins: My point was the best fighter build I know polearmmaster sentinel, which a paladin is even better at it cause he can smite which i consider magic as it uses spell slots? And yes the paladin is probably the 3rd best class in the game? maybe 4rth? Cleric is probably better especailly at Tier 3 and Tier 4.
Conclusion:
I see how you theorized to stop my rope trick that you have a devious mind and probably as well intersting ideas to solve problems. :) And regarding our fake PVP duell i would argue we leave it at that and if somebody ever can test it out we come back and show our results? looking forward to hear it? :)
Deciding to attack and actually doing it are two different things 😉
I decide to attack you and then don't actually do it, then you've suddenly triggered a resilient sphere of no benefit to you. This is always the conumdrum with reaction timing (and applies to Ready as well) as the more guarantee you have of an attack actually taking place, the more likely it is that you're hit before the contingency can trigger. And the same works in reverse, except that your opponent has an extremely easy counter-trigger; they can prepare whatever they like to occur the moment your resilient sphere goes down.
The problem is that you're only assuming that the Wizard gets to do that (once again, you're favouring the Wizard to get the outcome you want); if you give the Fighter the same freedom to prepare, and a budget corresponding to your 1,500 gp outlay for a single use of Contingency then they can come to the fight pretty tooled up themselves. For that kind of money you could purchase magic items if they're available, and/or get a load of the potions and poisons Crawler Mucus (Contact), Drow Poison (Injury) and Essence of Ether (Inhaled) are all unpleasant for a caster to get hit by.
But you're again ignoring that even the best plan can fail; you seem to keep ignoring this. If you need your opponent to fail a save for your plan to work, and they instead succeed, what then? Only certain casters have options for that, and even those aren't infallible. You can't just assume ideal conditions and everything always going your way.
It's not the sphere specifically that's the problem, it's your assumption that it's an automatic counter with no drawbacks; Dimension Door is no more effective because your opponent can still ready an action for when you come back into range. Mirror Image is always a handy spell, but every hit that doesn't resolve against you is an image destroyed, and if you combine it with shield you're burning additional spells, depleting resources faster, and probably only giving you an AC that's no better than the fighter's is without magic. A single action surge could brute force through that in a single turn to start delivering damage (and poison, and potentially other effects).
And enemies just stand there and take your damage, right? If enemies get into melee range, your archer is still a strong melee fighter, likely with high AC and hit points; a wizard being able to potentially do more damage by burning spells is again choosing to favour them in an ideal scenario while ignoring anything that doesn't fit the conclusion you want to make.
And the Fighter just starts shooting you at range again. I'm not even sure what you were trying to argue in the first place here? If your goal is to win against a Fighter then running away won't defeat them; and yet again (for what now feels like the thousandth time) you're intentionally giving the caster advantages so you can "win"; so what if you're a Tabaxi? So is the fighter, now they have the exact same speed you do unless you burn through your limited spell slots to go faster, and when you run out? You've still got an angry fighter after you who isn't going to let you sleep for eight hours to get those spells back.
So now your optimal fighter build suddenly only has a bow or his fists? I'm not wasting anymore time on this.
Look, it's great that you enjoy playing as a caster, I've played multiple caster characters and had a blast with them too, but I'm also all too aware of their limitations, and have butted up against them many times. But you're ignoring their drawbacks entirely, while going out of your way to stack all odds in favour of the conclusion you're determined to make.
Casters have drawbacks and limitations, pretending otherwise and ignoring anyone who disagrees doesn't make it not true.
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
Yes i agree we dont seem to sepak the same language. I am as well confused by your aguments. :)
as i understood our discussion we had a theorstical fight where you play the fighter and i play the wizard, so why would i not try to find ways to best you? finding a way to beat my save or suck spell mixed with portent which autwins me the game would have been your job or did i understand that wrong? I would have epxtected lucky or anything like it cause i have no clue how lucky and portent interact for example. But your arguemnt is always you ready an action (as if i am afraid of that) and that i waste resources which is not even true contingency i prepared up to 10 days ago and has not cost me single spell slot. And again our fight goes two rounds max or probably even only one cause my dex is 14 and yours lower if you are a strngh fighter, so i dont have to save spells? I could make a firework woth fireballs after you a a snale are in my bag? What does a non diviner do. Depends on the subclass but probably animate object or summon greater demon and then try to land a suck or save spell. I just pick a save you are not proficent if i have something. Unless there is a martial feature that blocks save or suck spells i dont see any chance that this outcome is not mine unless the wizard gets bad rng which in the case of the diviner would be 2-3 bad (resp. Good cause we want at least one bad roll for a forced fail) portents and then when casting the spell fails as well? We could caluclat how often that happens but that would probably be low?
i would even argue you could highly likely have found a case in pve where a fighter can do something a wizard cant. Like even a drinking contest or a punching contest or whatever but your weird focus on PVP think does not help your case.
maybe i just dont understand you cause you have probably figuredd out that this is not my native language. :) hopfeully a third party can explain me your point.
i think i got one point. You think i just pick spells that i want and have not prepared? No this are my standard choices. The only dmaage spell i take is fireball and magic missle at Tier 1, esle i only take such stuff cause how effective it is. The sorcerer can trhow lighntjng bolt or such damage spells. I concentrate on taking out big guys or slow small threats. Which of course would make my spell choices good in a duell.
and i think i got a second point you agrue my wizard cant take every role in the game? Yes of course but that is not the conclusion from my statement 4 players are better then one. I just argeu that 4 spellcasters are better then 4 non spellcasters (or 1 and 3, 2 and 2...). And since the newest cleric subclasses are out that let you share damage and heal temporary HP to everybody which is highly likely more heal than damage taken leaving your hp untouched. 🤣 i think its hard to argue against not ahving this two subclasses in your party? But i agree a totem barbarian would probably make this group even better then a moon druid mono class. If we multiclass i probably could solve that somehow, but that would be a Point for you? And please dont say again that is only sitatuanional. This is a method to make a party almost invincible fueld by short rests? I would argue that is usefull 99% of the time?
See ya on another topic! :)
CaitSith. You said the spellcasters beats the rogue 99.9% of the time for the infiltration and such scenarios.
My counterpoint: the campaigns are either too low level for people to be Scry-proof, have counter measures vs divination, use detect magic, see invisibility, or use anti magic fields. OR the DM is being too nice to have some of those done.
Additionally: The rogue (depending on subclass) can go in and “easily” dispatch single targets without causing an alarm or alerting people (easier for some subs than others). This is not something done by the familiar. Or a divination spell.
and lastly: the rogue, after dispatching someone. Can hide the body, dress up in their clothes and (depending on subclass) And imitate the victim. Which can even enable them to just let the rest of the party waltz in.
————————————————————
caitsith you then said this is something you see talked about frequently by (and I am paraphrasing here) professional D&D people.
I would say that these professionals have become a bit used to one trick pony tactics and such, and don’t think creatively enough, and as DMs have become set in their specific ways and patterns. That they are not constantly seeking to grow and develop.
I personally, will rarely stay, or run, a campaign, where the same thing will work, each time, over the course of an entire campaign.
example: level 3 Gloomstalkers get umbral sight. Would you seriously expect if you were on a nightly basis tearing through an orc camp with him that the Orcs, who rely on dark vision, would NEVER light a torch at some point. All of a sudden see this idiot ranger covered who they failed to find?
if your answer to the above is anything like “punishing players” then you are severely ignoring the intelligence stat block of anything that’s not a PC, or even PCs too, and doing a disservice to those playing.
Blank
So you want everyone to be a mage...
and yet in this world... no one ever uses dispel magic, detect magic, anti magic field, or anything like that?
as to the dragons and castle example. A castle provides a lot more protection against a dragon than does a village, or a forest, or a thatched hut, or a hammock, or a wagon....i literally struggle to see where you’re going with that.
as to your “invisible people” can rob a rich person blind. You don’t get rich by being an idiot. If anyone can turn invisible and rob you blind. That is 100% easier to stop (see alarm spell). Than it is to stop a skilled burglar (rogues) who know what kind of countermeasures people use. And who outperforms the DCs of all such things.
how is your spellcasters opening the locked chest? Knock? That’s quite loud. Putting it in a pocket dimension for later? Was it warded with a spell to prevent that? Did you check?
you make a lot of 1 way assumptions. When if you are going to make them and throw them out there. Need to be the same assumptions for both sides.
Blank