I always imagine these lvl20 x vs lvl 20 x as they're just dropped info a field and they have to find each other, do the Wizard wouldn't have time to or cast spells, although I do think the Wizard would have Mage Armor active since they rarely don't have it active, although I'm going under the assumption that contingency is not a factor.
A Wizard has 5 ASI so if they started with the standard array that's 15 Int, 14 Con, 12 Dex, (the other three are variables.) Assuming a high elf and taking the 5 ASI that's, 20 Int, 20 Con, 14 Dex. That's not that great. Assuming Mage Armor and depending on if they prioritize Dex over Con their AC 15-18, but with shield that's 20-23, which is not bad. And for HP average of 4+5 from Con x20=180HP, pretty decent actually.
A fighter had 7ASI but would also probably take a feat at some point. 15 Dex, 14 Con, (the other three are variables) Assuming Wood Elf and taking the 7 ASI that's, 20 Dex, 20 Con. With 2 feat options one which will either be Sharp Shooter or GWM, and the other is unknown. Stat wise the Fighter definitely has the edge, for AC the Fighter will have 17-20 AC (or 22-25 if they're an Eldritch Knight) depending on magic armor, so their AC is not as good as the Wizard. And for HP, average of 6+5 from Con x20=220, only slightly better than the Wizard but they can easily survive meteor swarm.
For the Fighter to win, they'll probably need to win initiative and kill the Wizard in one turn, we'll say the Fighter has +3 weapons, so they'll have a +14 to hit (+16 for an Archer), that's good but they'll still end up missing 1/3 to 1/2 of the time, damage wise assuming a great sword it's, 2d6 +8 =15 X 8 =120, not enough to kill a Wizard, however a Battle Master will deal an extra 6d12 =39, about enough to kill a Wizard, however, all of those attacks need to hit (which is why I didn't include the GWM bonus damage,) so if the Fighter can successfully land a shoving strike knocking the Wizard prone he'll have advantage on attacks, assuming AC of 20 he'll have a 94% chance of hitting, so it's plausibly to land all 8 attacks.
On Wizard's turn she'll cast Teleport to get away (assuming no counterspell) and than just long range spell attack the Fighter and if the Fighter uses ranged weapons than Wizard will call wind wall.
So in conclusion, Fighter has a chance of winning, but it's unlikely. Wizard win the majority of the time.
A diviner wizard gets, what, 3 portents at level 20? The fighter gets three uses of indomitable. So, regarding save/or/screw spells, it's down to the gods of luck.
Let's say the diviner uses the portent feature to influence initiative in round 1.
Wall of Force makes it rather one-dimensional unless fighter kills wizard immediately. That said, it will likely be an initative-battle, so if both are built for the battle, a Diviner with portent with lucky and alert feats will be hard to beat.
...The Fighter has to win initiative and kill the Wizard before the Wizard can take any actions. Invulnerability is a concentration spell but it makes the Wizard immune to all damage...for ten minutes. If a fighter can then survive literally every spell the Wizard has being thrown at him over sixty combat rounds then he will have a chance.
If we implement these ideas, then people had better start making sure they know about the local bye-laws regarding public nudity!
I wish the DMG actually had rules for attacking worn/carried objects instead of assuming you'd only ever attack unattended objects. As soon as players decide they want to break an enemy spellcaster's staff you find yourself in house rule territory.
If you can get close enough, you can attempt to pull the staff from the spell casters hand. Also, true if you start the battle next to them. DEX. check vs. STR. check in the PHB.
Wizard: Yes. I cast the Wish spell and I wish that everybody loves me!
DM: You transform into an irresistible, magnificent feast. It was so great, all who participated in devouring you tell of the joy they felt with tears in their eyes and all who hear the tale only feel sorrow that they weren't there to eat.
Many of these arguments are based on the assumption that the fighter needs to severely damage or kill the wizard in the first round or its game over for the fighter. How does the fighter overcome a wizard that uses Contingency paired with Otilukes Resilient Sphere which is pretty much guaranteed to keep the wizard alive through that important first round.
If the wizard knew the battle was going to happen then yes, contingency would work. But basically, unless the wizard is a complete moron, a fighter would need to kill him before he takes a turn or it's game over.
Couldn't a 20th level Wizard have Contingency (when a weapon reaches within 1 feet of the wizard or when wizard takes more than 1HP of damage) - Farstep or anti-life shield. Hopefully this will give the wizard enough time to teleport out of there, Buff up and bring a lot of pain and suffering to the attacker?
As for Fighters having magic items, wouldn't it be fair to say Wizards had equally powerful magic items? or is a handicap given to the fighter?
A diviner wizard can make the fighter lose initiative. Then he could True Polymorph into a Ancient Brass Dragon and fly 610 feet above the ground and wait for true polymorph to become pernament. Then he is permanently a creature that is a good fight for 4 level 20 fighters. He could fly around the fighter and use his sleep breath until the fighter fails his save. Then the wizard would pick him up, fly straight upwards to a height of 610 feet. Then drop the fighter. The wizard could continue to repeat until the fighter dies.
Hobgoblin necromancer/conjurer/bladesinger would put up a hell of a fight. With proficiency in light armor and two martial weapons of their choice(3 for the bladesinger) summoning creatures to protect them. And having a high enough dex/con to be in the front lines with rapier and booming blade/green flame blade and grabbing the tough feat for extra hp. The fight in my opinion in this case would go to the wizard.
Hobgoblin necromancer/conjurer/bladesinger would put up a hell of a fight. With proficiency in light armor and two martial weapons of their choice(3 for the bladesinger) summoning creatures to protect them. And having a high enough dex/con to be in the front lines with rapier and booming blade/green flame blade and grabbing the tough feat for extra hp. The fight in my opinion in this case would go to the wizard.
Also Tenser's Transformation
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
If the wizard tries to out-melee the fighter, they're generally going to fail.
Light armor is worse compared to mage armor without being enchanted, and the enchanted robes are better than enchanted leather imho. So that shouldn't even be a consideration.
Conjured critters are Concentration spell (sacrificing the ability to use strong control or evasion spells), make a poor bulwark (fighter ignores the creature, take the OA and hit the wizard), and are pretty weak comparatively (you can only summon up to a CR 9 elemental as a wizard, a negligible speed bump for a level 20 fighter). Necromancer creatures likewise are too low level to make a challenge - even Create Undead cast at level 9 can only bring out two CR 3 critters. The wizard simply can't deal enough damage from pets and picking up weapons to out damage the Fighter in melee - they're too squishy, even with the Tough feat. The extra damage from Booming Blade / Green Flame Blade are worse than having a second Attack action.
If you want to send a wizard into melee, you need to stack up, not on HP, but on raising your AC and evasion abilities to high levels. Misty Step, Shield as Spell Mastery options. Put up Fire Shield if you have the time before entering melee. At any point in time, you're going to be deciding between Haste, Tenser's Transformation, Greater Invisibiliy and Shadow Blade as your Concentration spells - Shadow Blade is especially nice to keep as a backup, because you can't forget that a Battlemaster is potentially going to be knocking the weapons out of your hand, and sometimes you want to cast-and-attack in the same turn rather than having to waste a turn casting full action spells.
Now, a fully kited out Bladesinger can theoretically do as much damage as a Fighter, the bonuses from various sources should keep his Concentration spell up, and the ability to sacrifice spell slots for extra HP should keep them in the game as well. Always have Shield active for that +4 AC, and you can use Misty Step for a kiting action set (step in, hit, Misty Step away, run away more so the Fighter has to waste resources on keeping up) or rely on an off-hand attack (if using Tenser's Transformation, not worthwhile otherwise). Bladesinger has extra HP from sacrificing spell slots, extra damage, extra Concentration save, necessary extra AC and Extra Attack. Being in melee and getting knocked down is also a thing - its a common Battlemaster tactic, where the Fighter gets advantage on you while you suffer disadvantage. Tenser's Transformation puts you on equal ground, but again unreliable, so you're going to want to have Bladesinger's advantage on Acrobatics save to avoid trip attempts. You might also need Misty Step to avoid a Polearm Mastery + Sentinel combo.
Probably the hardest part of this scenario, though, is actually hitting the Fighter. We can make it really hard for the Fighter to hit the Wizard, we can add on all the survivability onto the mage we can, we can make the damage per hit on par with the Fighter's. But we can't actually hit the fighter worth crap. Tenser's Transformation (advantage on attack rolls) and Shadowblade (advantage in dim light) are the only two spells we have that boost accuracy, whereas a fighter has a few options for raising AC and evasion as well. All the melee-fu a wizard pulls out is meaningless if they fail to maintain Tenser's Transformation and its a well lit area.
all very valid points but when it comes to the necromancer its not about how hard you hit but but how many hit if you play your cards right a necromancer could have almost 2000 undead under their control if you use your 8th and ninth lv spells to bring up wights through command who have their own collection of 12 thralls per wight use your 14 lv ability command undead to grab a mummy lord who has the spell animate dead spend your seventh on simulacrum so they do the same as you grab a couple of topaz spell gems you just need to overwhelm the fighter with shear numbers the youtube channel talking20 made a video that just says what i just said if you think the math is flawed
all very valid points but when it comes to the necromancer its not about how hard you hit but but how many hit if you play your cards right a necromancer could have almost 2000 undead under their control if you use your 8th and ninth lv spells to bring up wights through command who have their own collection of 12 thralls per wight use your 14 lv ability command undead to grab a mummy lord who has the spell animate dead spend your seventh on simulacrum so they do the same as you grab a couple of topaz spell gems you just need to overwhelm the fighter with shear numbers the youtube channel talking20 made a video that just says what i just said if you think the math is flawed
Theoretically infinite undead if you don't care who you kill, and just walk into a random town and do Finger of Death on a random commoner. You could have infinite zombies this way, assuming you have a large city to do this to over the course of several years, if you used your 7th, 8th, and 9th spell slots this way for 6 years straight, you would have 6,570 permanent zombies, plus however many you have from animate dead and create undead. Wizards would definitely win this fight, they don't even have to get close to the fighter, and they've won already.
You don't even need to be a necromancer to do this, you just have to store your zombies somewhere, and make sure you have time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
all very valid points but when it comes to the necromancer its not about how hard you hit but but how many hit if you play your cards right a necromancer could have almost 2000 undead under their control if you use your 8th and ninth lv spells to bring up wights through command who have their own collection of 12 thralls per wight use your 14 lv ability command undead to grab a mummy lord who has the spell animate dead spend your seventh on simulacrum so they do the same as you grab a couple of topaz spell gems you just need to overwhelm the fighter with shear numbers the youtube channel talking20 made a video that just says what i just said if you think the math is flawed
Oh, you could do very well with a necromancer. There's actually a very nice combo where you repeatedly spam Irrestiable Dance, denying actions, while undead get to munch slowly on the target.
The fundamental problem comes down to the fact that if the warrior gets in range to hit you with his weapon, you'll go down, entirely likely in a single round. Giving the wizard melee weapons, even if surrounded by pets, and expecting them to use them in melee range is suicidal. What a Necromancer wants to do is equip all his/her/zir undead with bows, and then stay at range and kite the warrior, while a few keep the target pinned in place.
Pets aren't enough to keep the wizard safe if you jump into melee. You need tactics.
all very valid points but when it comes to the necromancer its not about how hard you hit but but how many hit if you play your cards right a necromancer could have almost 2000 undead under their control if you use your 8th and ninth lv spells to bring up wights through command who have their own collection of 12 thralls per wight use your 14 lv ability command undead to grab a mummy lord who has the spell animate dead spend your seventh on simulacrum so they do the same as you grab a couple of topaz spell gems you just need to overwhelm the fighter with shear numbers the youtube channel talking20 made a video that just says what i just said if you think the math is flawed
Oh, you could do very well with a necromancer. There's actually a very nice combo where you repeatedly spam Irrestiable Dance, denying actions, while undead get to munch slowly on the target.
The fundamental problem comes down to the fact that if the warrior gets in range to hit you with his weapon, you'll go down, entirely likely in a single round. Giving the wizard melee weapons, even if surrounded by pets, and expecting them to use them in melee range is suicidal. What a Necromancer wants to do is equip all his/her/zir undead with bows, and then stay at range and kite the warrior, while a few keep the target pinned in place.
Pets aren't enough to keep the wizard safe if you jump into melee. You need tactics.
Greater invisibility.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Greater invisibility can grant advantage, did forget about that one. Still a crap thing to rely on for going into melee - far too many answers in the various Fighter toolkits for that.
All in all, there's no time when going melee as a wizard is better than keeping at range for fighting a Fighter. Its literally playing right into your opponent's hand while throwing away your own, setting yourself up for failure. Even a level 20 bladesinger is arguably better at range, at least according to the min-max groups, though I think that rather defeats the purpose of one.
I always imagine these lvl20 x vs lvl 20 x as they're just dropped info a field and they have to find each other, do the Wizard wouldn't have time to or cast spells, although I do think the Wizard would have Mage Armor active since they rarely don't have it active, although I'm going under the assumption that contingency is not a factor.
A Wizard has 5 ASI so if they started with the standard array that's 15 Int, 14 Con, 12 Dex, (the other three are variables.) Assuming a high elf and taking the 5 ASI that's, 20 Int, 20 Con, 14 Dex. That's not that great. Assuming Mage Armor and depending on if they prioritize Dex over Con their AC 15-18, but with shield that's 20-23, which is not bad. And for HP average of 4+5 from Con x20=180HP, pretty decent actually.
A fighter had 7ASI but would also probably take a feat at some point. 15 Dex, 14 Con, (the other three are variables) Assuming Wood Elf and taking the 7 ASI that's, 20 Dex, 20 Con. With 2 feat options one which will either be Sharp Shooter or GWM, and the other is unknown. Stat wise the Fighter definitely has the edge, for AC the Fighter will have 17-20 AC (or 22-25 if they're an Eldritch Knight) depending on magic armor, so their AC is not as good as the Wizard. And for HP, average of 6+5 from Con x20=220, only slightly better than the Wizard but they can easily survive meteor swarm.
For the Fighter to win, they'll probably need to win initiative and kill the Wizard in one turn, we'll say the Fighter has +3 weapons, so they'll have a +14 to hit (+16 for an Archer), that's good but they'll still end up missing 1/3 to 1/2 of the time, damage wise assuming a great sword it's, 2d6 +8 =15 X 8 =120, not enough to kill a Wizard, however a Battle Master will deal an extra 6d12 =39, about enough to kill a Wizard, however, all of those attacks need to hit (which is why I didn't include the GWM bonus damage,) so if the Fighter can successfully land a shoving strike knocking the Wizard prone he'll have advantage on attacks, assuming AC of 20 he'll have a 94% chance of hitting, so it's plausibly to land all 8 attacks.
On Wizard's turn she'll cast Teleport to get away (assuming no counterspell) and than just long range spell attack the Fighter and if the Fighter uses ranged weapons than Wizard will call wind wall.
So in conclusion, Fighter has a chance of winning, but it's unlikely. Wizard win the majority of the time.
Most forget # 1 thing i think / its how the dice rolls
A diviner wizard gets, what, 3 portents at level 20?
The fighter gets three uses of indomitable. So, regarding save/or/screw spells, it's down to the gods of luck.
Let's say the diviner uses the portent feature to influence initiative in round 1.
Now we're talking.
Wall of Force makes it rather one-dimensional unless fighter kills wizard immediately. That said, it will likely be an initative-battle, so if both are built for the battle, a Diviner with portent with lucky and alert feats will be hard to beat.
you guys forget something: FLY
...The Fighter has to win initiative and kill the Wizard before the Wizard can take any actions. Invulnerability is a concentration spell but it makes the Wizard immune to all damage...for ten minutes. If a fighter can then survive literally every spell the Wizard has being thrown at him over sixty combat rounds then he will have a chance.
Abide.
Eldritch Knight also has Fly.
If you can get close enough, you can attempt to pull the staff from the spell casters hand. Also, true if you start the battle next to them. DEX. check vs. STR. check in the PHB.
Sorry for the double post.
DM: Are you sure?
Wizard: Yes. I cast the Wish spell and I wish that everybody loves me!
DM: You transform into an irresistible, magnificent feast. It was so great, all who participated in devouring you tell of the joy they felt with tears in their eyes and all who hear the tale only feel sorrow that they weren't there to eat.
Many of these arguments are based on the assumption that the fighter needs to severely damage or kill the wizard in the first round or its game over for the fighter. How does the fighter overcome a wizard that uses Contingency paired with Otilukes Resilient Sphere which is pretty much guaranteed to keep the wizard alive through that important first round.
If the wizard knew the battle was going to happen then yes, contingency would work. But basically, unless the wizard is a complete moron, a fighter would need to kill him before he takes a turn or it's game over.
Only just reading this now.
Couldn't a 20th level Wizard have Contingency (when a weapon reaches within 1 feet of the wizard or when wizard takes more than 1HP of damage) - Farstep or anti-life shield. Hopefully this will give the wizard enough time to teleport out of there, Buff up and bring a lot of pain and suffering to the attacker?
As for Fighters having magic items, wouldn't it be fair to say Wizards had equally powerful magic items? or is a handicap given to the fighter?
A diviner wizard can make the fighter lose initiative. Then he could True Polymorph into a Ancient Brass Dragon and fly 610 feet above the ground and wait for true polymorph to become pernament. Then he is permanently a creature that is a good fight for 4 level 20 fighters. He could fly around the fighter and use his sleep breath until the fighter fails his save. Then the wizard would pick him up, fly straight upwards to a height of 610 feet. Then drop the fighter. The wizard could continue to repeat until the fighter dies.
Hobgoblin necromancer/conjurer/bladesinger would put up a hell of a fight. With proficiency in light armor and two martial weapons of their choice(3 for the bladesinger) summoning creatures to protect them. And having a high enough dex/con to be in the front lines with rapier and booming blade/green flame blade and grabbing the tough feat for extra hp. The fight in my opinion in this case would go to the wizard.
Also Tenser's Transformation
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
If the wizard tries to out-melee the fighter, they're generally going to fail.
Light armor is worse compared to mage armor without being enchanted, and the enchanted robes are better than enchanted leather imho. So that shouldn't even be a consideration.
Conjured critters are Concentration spell (sacrificing the ability to use strong control or evasion spells), make a poor bulwark (fighter ignores the creature, take the OA and hit the wizard), and are pretty weak comparatively (you can only summon up to a CR 9 elemental as a wizard, a negligible speed bump for a level 20 fighter). Necromancer creatures likewise are too low level to make a challenge - even Create Undead cast at level 9 can only bring out two CR 3 critters. The wizard simply can't deal enough damage from pets and picking up weapons to out damage the Fighter in melee - they're too squishy, even with the Tough feat. The extra damage from Booming Blade / Green Flame Blade are worse than having a second Attack action.
If you want to send a wizard into melee, you need to stack up, not on HP, but on raising your AC and evasion abilities to high levels. Misty Step, Shield as Spell Mastery options. Put up Fire Shield if you have the time before entering melee. At any point in time, you're going to be deciding between Haste, Tenser's Transformation, Greater Invisibiliy and Shadow Blade as your Concentration spells - Shadow Blade is especially nice to keep as a backup, because you can't forget that a Battlemaster is potentially going to be knocking the weapons out of your hand, and sometimes you want to cast-and-attack in the same turn rather than having to waste a turn casting full action spells.
Now, a fully kited out Bladesinger can theoretically do as much damage as a Fighter, the bonuses from various sources should keep his Concentration spell up, and the ability to sacrifice spell slots for extra HP should keep them in the game as well. Always have Shield active for that +4 AC, and you can use Misty Step for a kiting action set (step in, hit, Misty Step away, run away more so the Fighter has to waste resources on keeping up) or rely on an off-hand attack (if using Tenser's Transformation, not worthwhile otherwise). Bladesinger has extra HP from sacrificing spell slots, extra damage, extra Concentration save, necessary extra AC and Extra Attack. Being in melee and getting knocked down is also a thing - its a common Battlemaster tactic, where the Fighter gets advantage on you while you suffer disadvantage. Tenser's Transformation puts you on equal ground, but again unreliable, so you're going to want to have Bladesinger's advantage on Acrobatics save to avoid trip attempts. You might also need Misty Step to avoid a Polearm Mastery + Sentinel combo.
Probably the hardest part of this scenario, though, is actually hitting the Fighter. We can make it really hard for the Fighter to hit the Wizard, we can add on all the survivability onto the mage we can, we can make the damage per hit on par with the Fighter's. But we can't actually hit the fighter worth crap. Tenser's Transformation (advantage on attack rolls) and Shadowblade (advantage in dim light) are the only two spells we have that boost accuracy, whereas a fighter has a few options for raising AC and evasion as well. All the melee-fu a wizard pulls out is meaningless if they fail to maintain Tenser's Transformation and its a well lit area.
all very valid points but when it comes to the necromancer its not about how hard you hit but but how many hit if you play your cards right a necromancer could have almost 2000 undead under their control if you use your 8th and ninth lv spells to bring up wights through command who have their own collection of 12 thralls per wight use your 14 lv ability command undead to grab a mummy lord who has the spell animate dead spend your seventh on simulacrum so they do the same as you grab a couple of topaz spell gems you just need to overwhelm the fighter with shear numbers the youtube channel talking20 made a video that just says what i just said if you think the math is flawed
Theoretically infinite undead if you don't care who you kill, and just walk into a random town and do Finger of Death on a random commoner. You could have infinite zombies this way, assuming you have a large city to do this to over the course of several years, if you used your 7th, 8th, and 9th spell slots this way for 6 years straight, you would have 6,570 permanent zombies, plus however many you have from animate dead and create undead. Wizards would definitely win this fight, they don't even have to get close to the fighter, and they've won already.
You don't even need to be a necromancer to do this, you just have to store your zombies somewhere, and make sure you have time.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Oh, you could do very well with a necromancer. There's actually a very nice combo where you repeatedly spam Irrestiable Dance, denying actions, while undead get to munch slowly on the target.
The fundamental problem comes down to the fact that if the warrior gets in range to hit you with his weapon, you'll go down, entirely likely in a single round. Giving the wizard melee weapons, even if surrounded by pets, and expecting them to use them in melee range is suicidal. What a Necromancer wants to do is equip all his/her/zir undead with bows, and then stay at range and kite the warrior, while a few keep the target pinned in place.
Pets aren't enough to keep the wizard safe if you jump into melee. You need tactics.
Greater invisibility.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Greater invisibility can grant advantage, did forget about that one. Still a crap thing to rely on for going into melee - far too many answers in the various Fighter toolkits for that.
All in all, there's no time when going melee as a wizard is better than keeping at range for fighting a Fighter. Its literally playing right into your opponent's hand while throwing away your own, setting yourself up for failure. Even a level 20 bladesinger is arguably better at range, at least according to the min-max groups, though I think that rather defeats the purpose of one.