So I have a wizard (school of conjuration, currently lvl 4) and I'm starting to notice just how detrimental the squishyness of the class is. I have low dex due to character reasons, so my AC is only 9.
I've been looking at various options to up my AC in the coming levels, and I guess the easiest one would be to perhaps multiclass into cleric (life domain)? Otherwise I could wait for the ability score improvement at lvl 8 to take the Lightly armoured feat, but it seems less viable because 1. I'd have to wait till lvl 8, and 2. I need that ability score improvement to up my INT to 20.
So I guess my question is, is it worth it taking one level of cleric and losing one level of wizard? Is it smart to do it now, or perhaps wait till later levels? Or perhaps I should take that feat instead?
What really helps is having Mage Armor and Shield always prepared. Mage Armor lasts 8 hours (so you could cast it when you wake up in the morning), giving you an AC of 13 (well, 12 for your character), and shield adds 5 to it as a reaction. Then I would try to get 10 dex as soon as possible to cancel the negative Modifier.
Note that shield lasts not for the triggering instance of damage, but until the start of your next turn. That's a 1st level spellslot well spent!
Or you yould take the Lightly Armored Feat, giving you +1 dex to make it 10, and proficiency in light armor for an 11/12 in AC permanently.
Personally, I don't like to multiclass for the sole purpose of getting "better" features, but a logical choice based of the backstory or campaign plottwists, but it's your decision in the end.
For the traditional wizard feeling, Mage Armor and Shield and staying in the back of the group is the way to go, if you wanna go Frontline wizard, armor proficiency or multiclass is the better choice (or you could change to bladesinger if the DM allows)
Thank you for the advice! While multiclassing into cleric would from a storytelling pov make sense for my character, Life domain isn't necessarily the subclass I felt fit the best, so I do feel better seeing as there are other options that wont tie me down permanently, but that I don't have to wait around for forever either.
While I do already have Shield, I will definitely learn Mage armour ASAP too!
So I have a wizard (school of conjuration, currently lvl 4) and I'm starting to notice just how detrimental the squishyness of the class is. I have low dex due to character reasons, so my AC is only 9.
I've been looking at various options to up my AC in the coming levels, and I guess the easiest one would be to perhaps multiclass into cleric (life domain)? Otherwise I could wait for the ability score improvement at lvl 8 to take the Lightly armoured feat, but it seems less viable because 1. I'd have to wait till lvl 8, and 2. I need that ability score improvement to up my INT to 20.
So I guess my question is, is it worth it taking one level of cleric and losing one level of wizard? Is it smart to do it now, or perhaps wait till later levels? Or perhaps I should take that feat instead?
Beyond the mage armor/shield combo, the best way to 'improve' your AC is to make is as irrelevant as possible
There are all kinds of other spells that make you harder to hit or to target. blur, blink, invisibility, etc
There are also all kinds of ways to just stay out of reach of enemies trying to hit you. misty step is a staple for a reason
If your character has a low DEX, it's always going to limit just how high your AC can get no matter what you do. Focus instead on how to avoid getting hit, so your AC never comes into play
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
There are all kinds of other spells that make you harder to hit or to target. blur, blink, invisibility, etc
Mirror image is a favourite of mine for this; it requires no concentration and I tend to think of it as spending a spell slot to reduce the number of times you need to cast shield, but it's really for when you're taking a lot of fire (as Stryke89 says, the best defence is often to avoid being a target at all). Like a lot of these other additional options it takes an action so it's for those cases where you either know the fight is coming imminently and have a turn to prepare, or when you're in a bad way and think your best option is to go defensive. I'd also consider rope trick as an option; bigger enemies can't follow you inside, so as long as the rope is short enough to climb in a turn it's actually a pretty decent panic button spell, plus I just love it. 😂
Also worth keeping in mind that everybody has access to half cover and three-quarters cover if there's any in an environment; when your DM describes an area, always fish for obstacles etc. that you might be able to take cover behind if you're in danger. It's a thing that often gets overlooked in theatre of the mind games but it's such a big defensive boost that lower AC characters should take advantage of whenever possible.
Part of the reason your heavily armoured sword and board fighters and paladins can get such high basic AC's is because they're the ones that aren't likely to be benefiting from cover much (doesn't work against melee attackers), everybody with a lower AC should be trying to keep their head down if they can if your campaign has a lot of tough combat.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
What is your race, strength, wisdom, Charisma and constitution.
That will largely dictate your choices.
Here are some options:
Cleric with a heavy armor subclass is a great option, but you would need both a high strength (15+) and a 13 wisdom to wear plate
Artificer would give you 14 AC in half plate and you would not lose any spell slots.
If you have a 13 strength and high constitution (16+) multiclass to Barbarian for a 12+AC naked or 14 AC with half plate.
If you have a 13+ in charisma you can multiclass to draconic sorcerer, that will give you a 12AC, plus you can get the shield spell as one of your two spells. You also get 4 cantrips with this.
Hexblade Warlock will give you medium armor and a short rest spell slot. You can also get shield spell with this combo.
Thank you for the advice! While multiclassing into cleric would from a storytelling pov make sense for my character, Life domain isn't necessarily the subclass I felt fit the best, so I do feel better seeing as there are other options that wont tie me down permanently, but that I don't have to wait around for forever either.
While I do already have Shield, I will definitely learn Mage armour ASAP too!
The following domains grant heavy armor proficiency:
Forge (this will also let you jump to AC 19, not 18, due to its subclass benefit providing you with +1 armor)
Life (this is incredible on a build that has efficient healing - it's a common 1-dip for druid mixes, as a result. I know a Life 1 Wizard 19 build, but I doubt you're playing it - you need to build around getting healing spells onto your wizard list; broadly recommend you ignore this)
Nature (this is a worthless 1-dip)
Order (the L1 Order benefit has potentially significant benefits for you, depending on your choice of spells)
Tempest (this is a worthless 1-dip)
Twilight (the L1 Twilight benefit isn't nearly as gamebreaking as, say, 1 level of Peace, but it will let you turn spell slots into 300 foot darkvisionfor party members)
War (this is a worthless 1-dip)
Presenting again with only the ones worth considering for you, probably:
Forge (+1 AC, for maximum durability; both L1 domain spells are worthless)
Order (all of your spells let your spell target attack - the best choice if you lean into buffing and party support)
Twilight (all of your spell slots can be 300' darkvision)
Since you're Conjuration-specced, I'm guessing Order would be your best bet.
If you're worried about a wizard's AC, you shouldn't play a wizard. I mean, everyone can play what they want, but in a traditional wizard style of play, AC isn't a priority. You have your entire list of spells to protect yourself, as well as positioning, use of the environment, etc... You should never be on the frontline, and you have tricks to get out of there if you get caught. Your priority as a wizard is your magic. The rest is secondary or tertiary. If you can't cover your gaps with your magic, well, you're not playing your wizard the way it's supposed to be played. Some options you have to protect yourself are shield, blur, absorb elements, silvery barbs or mirror image. But there are other options at higher levels that will make you virtually invulnerable. Of course, be careful not to focus too much on protection to the detriment of other types of spells. Generally with a couple of the spells I've listed above, you'll be fine. You just have to analyze well when to use them.
You should never be on the frontline, and you have tricks to get out of there if you get caught. Your priority as a wizard is your magic.
unless you want to be on the front line and you don't want magic to be your priority. The beauty of D&D is that you can build your character however you want. The whole 'you should play your class like this' is just not how some people want to play. If i want to play a one-handed rogue with 8 dexterity...I can, while still being an active and contributing part of the group. If he wants to play a wizard and worry about armor, that shouldn't be discouraged - its equally as valid as wanting to play a 20 INT wizard with a silk robe hiding in the bushes.
If you're worried about a wizard's AC, you shouldn't play a wizard. I mean, everyone can play what they want, but in a traditional wizard style of play, AC isn't a priority. You have your entire list of spells to protect yourself, as well as positioning, use of the environment, etc... You should never be on the frontline, and you have tricks to get out of there if you get caught.
If wizards and sorcerers use all their spells to protect themselves and stay in the back line then they are not really helping the party a whole lot.
I have no problem with an armorless back line wizard that stays out of harms way, but if you do that you should be laying down offense (i.e. the crowd pleasers). I also have no problem with Wizards that focus on defense, but they should not be on the back line. If your spells are making it hard for the enemy to hit you, then to help the party you really need the enemy to attack you so you get the utility out of those spells. A front-line Wizard in Heavy Armor or a bladesinger is an example of this - concentrating mostly on defensive spells but really sucking up attacks and keeping them off of your allies.
With the defensive back liner; the combat starts and the first thing the Wizard does is cast greater invisibility. So that is a turn lost where he isn't helping the party, then he is invisible and away from the front so he isn't drawing attacks, the fighters, clerics and Rogues are absorbing his "share" of the attacks. It gets around to his turn again and he can cast a spell to help, but he has already spent a 4th level slot and he is concentrating, so he is limited to his less effective spells which do not require concentration.
I played with a group of strangers once, we played a Goblin Ranger (me), Kobold Rogue, Human Wizard Evoker, Human Divine Sorcerer, the campaign went from 1-14. This was a pick up game where the players did not know each other before hand. By the end of it we were tired of the Sorcerer and we did not invite him to the next campaign. We felt he was dead weight, taking experience and treasure while not helping. He would go into combat and cast spells like Greater Invisibiility or Haste on himself, occasionally he would twin it and get someone else, but for the most part he concentrated on protecting himself. The Evoker was the opposite, he had no armor (only mage armor) and shield spell, but he was constantly mixing it up. If he needed to move up close to the BBEG to get the guy in the back in the AOE he would do it (and he went down quite often as a result). We (the Rogue and I) had a lot more respect for the Evoker and thought he was much more of a contributor than the Sorc.
You should never be on the frontline, and you have tricks to get out of there if you get caught. Your priority as a wizard is your magic.
unless you want to be on the front line and you don't want magic to be your priority. The beauty of D&D is that you can build your character however you want. The whole 'you should play your class like this' is just not how some people want to play. If i want to play a one-handed rogue with 8 dexterity...I can, while still being an active and contributing part of the group. If he wants to play a wizard and worry about armor, that shouldn't be discouraged - its equally as valid as wanting to play a 20 INT wizard with a silk robe hiding in the bushes.
...all imo.
I've heard that absurd argument so many times, I don't even know where to start. But anyway. It is obvious that you can play the character that you want. It is so obvious that it is absurd to mention it, but I usually do it to avoid replies like yours (You can read it at the beginning of my message). However, classes are designed one way for a reason. The wizard, in particular, is designed to be physically weak, but magically powerful. That is the basic concept, and that is why I speak of the traditional wizard. Did you read that? Well, the traditional wizard is not designed to use high AC, and doesn't need it at all. Do you want to play a wizard with a high AC, and be on the frontline? For that a specific subclass was designed: The Bladesinger. Still want to play an atypical wizard in medium armor? Your best option is either a level in artifice, or gain proficiency in armor for your race. Do you need to do that? Not at all. But if you want to play that character, nothing is stopping you. And you can still be competent. But then why are you playing a Wizard? And if you want to play a wizard that's in melee, why don't you play a Bladesinger? In short, why complicate your life? These questions are rhetorical. The answer is very simple: Because I want to play that. And that's fine. But it's also okay, in my opinion, to think about the fact that a Wizard doesn't really need to have AC. It's not a priority in the wizard, you shouldn't worry about it. Does that mean you can't play an armored wizard? Of course not. I repeat it again to avoid wasting time with future posts stating the obvious.
In short, the wizard is designed to use magic. That's the flavor of the class, and it should be the first thing you think of when you need to solve a problem. Can I fix this with magic?
It isn't as simple as "As wizard that stands at the back doesn't need high AC because the melee guys take all the hits". Intelligent enemies recognise both the power and the fraility of wizards and that makes them a target. Just as the party should, the enemy melee types will try to block the party melee guys so their ranged attackers can hail arrows or firebolts at the wizard. If the party frontline get into melee with the bad guys it is still often better to take the op attack or make a ranged attack at disadvantaged to try and take the wizard out first.
Once you hit level 5 cantrips do alost as much damage as a level 1 spells and while spells like fog cloud and grease can still be useful It is reasonable to use most of your level 1 slots for defence and your second and thrid for the party (note mage armor is cast out of combat, for shield you might need to consider whether your reaction might be needed for something else like counterspell, though you can not counterspell while unconcious!)
I wouldn't look at light armor, it is inferior to mage armor and you are getting to a point where 1 1st level spell per day is trivial.
If you get medium proficiency a breastplate will only increase you AC from 12 (with mage armor) to 13, but if you also get shield proficiency that goes up to 15 (if you go this route discuss with your DM how you can handle casting somantic spells when you have a focus in one had and a shield in the other, can you for example have a wand attached to some string so you can drop it, cast your spell and then use object interaction to pick it up again?). If you get half plate you can add one more to your AC at the cost of less stealth.
With a negative dex modifier you really benefit by going heavy Plate will give you and AC of 18, 20 with a shield and Forge cleric gives you the option to go to 21 (at least until everyone else has magic armor and weapons this is overkill, give the blessing of the forge to one of the martial's armor or weapon).
In reality you can only get heavy armor proficiency by multiclassing into cleric (ignoring options like take 3 feats). This requires 13 wisdom, it does NOT require 15 strength though failing to meet the strength requirement reduces your movement speed by 10ft (unless you are a dwarf), that is a significant penalty but one you may choose to accept.
If you choose to take a level of cleric go with whatever domain fits your character, while Quindraco may have picked out the most optimised domains all of them can provide something useful at times (for example with a level of war cleric after casting firebolt you can throw a javelin as a bonus action which could be good if you have high strength) you are really taking cleric for heavy armore proficiency anyway.
Whatever your AC wont have the HP to be not be frail. If the enemy casts fireball on you is probably wont end well!
You should never be on the frontline, and you have tricks to get out of there if you get caught. Your priority as a wizard is your magic.
unless you want to be on the front line and you don't want magic to be your priority. The beauty of D&D is that you can build your character however you want. The whole 'you should play your class like this' is just not how some people want to play. If i want to play a one-handed rogue with 8 dexterity...I can, while still being an active and contributing part of the group. If he wants to play a wizard and worry about armor, that shouldn't be discouraged - its equally as valid as wanting to play a 20 INT wizard with a silk robe hiding in the bushes.
...all imo.
Still want to play an atypical wizard in medium armor? Your best option is either a level in artifice, or gain proficiency in armor for your race. Do you need to do that? Not at all. But if you want to play that character, nothing is stopping you. And you can still be competent. But then why are you playing a Wizard? And if you want to play a wizard that's in melee, why don't you play a Bladesinger? In short, why complicate your life?
I do think I need to point out that you need to be within 5 feet of a creature to use the enchantment wizard's signature ability and that you need to stay there if you want to get more than 1 round out of it. Also spells like sword burst and shocking grasp pretty much need to be used in melee. So the idea that wizards are designed to always stay out of melee is not supported by the spells or subclass abilities, many of which predate the bladesinger.
In any case playing an 8-strength Mountain Dwarf Enchantment Wizard in Plate is pretty awesome. You can't do that well with a bladesinger because of the armor restrictions on bladesong (you can still do it and you can be effective, but it is certainly an off theme build). A 1-level cleric dip is the best way to do this combo, and you won't even lose spell slots. You can also do it with the heavily armored feat without multiclassing too.
My next build is going to be a multiclass Enchantment Wizard-Order Cleric. Admittedly, he is going to be more cleric than wizard until 16th level.
The reason I want to do this combo is because I want to be able to use hypnotic gaze and then cast enchantment spells like Tasha's Mind Whip, psychic lance or synaptic static as a bonus action while using my action for hypnotic gaze. At first glance it would seem to be very MAD, needing intelligence for the saves and wisdom for max uses of embodiment of law, however I can do this effectively with an 8 in both dexterity and strength. I am planning to go completely weaponless on this build.
Sometimes it is difficult to try to explain something when the interlocutor does not want to understand it. So I'm going to leave it here. Whoever wants to understand what I mean, perfect. Whoever wants to try to reinvent the wheel, that's up to them.
Some people create their characters based on role play and some on trying to optimise. That is fine as long as everyone in the party is on board, a single highly optimised player in a group can outshine the other characters making the came less fun for them.
I had always thought Hypnotic Gaze was designed because while wizards don't want ot be in melee, melee characters want to get in melee range of the wizard. If that happens a successful hypnotic gaze means they can easily get away. It is the equivalent of misty step but leaves the enemy vulnerable to the the attacks of the rest of the party. A wizard using sword burst is for similar circumstances with the hope of killing (or at least reducing the number) of enemies surrounding the wizard.
A Strength 8 dwarf with plate might get the DM checkin on encumberance as it uses over have your allowance even using the standard rules. If you are using variant encumberance it wont work at all. Going to strength 10 or 11 would lessen the issue and seem to make sense logically. (Dwarves don't need a strength of 15 for plate armor not to slow tham down but they do need more than 8)
A wizard has many ways to get out of melee if he doesn't want to be there. Shocking Grasp, for example, which is for that (not to be your usual attack). Misty step, of course. And other options depending on the situation, and your choice of spells. That is the key when you play a wizard to choose your spells well. That's your strength, and the reason you want to play a wizard, right? For his spell list.
In any case, if a wizard doesn't want to be in melee, they have plenty of ways to avoid it. Obviously most of his solutions derive from his magic which is what makes the class what it is.
A wizard has many ways to get out of melee if he doesn't want to be there. Shocking Grasp, for example, which is for that (not to be your usual attack).\
Shocking grasp only works for this if you hit, which is far from certain and limited to a single enemy. This makes it an extremely weak way to disengage. Spells like Thunderstep or misty step are effectivefor that.
Disengage works a lot better shocking grasp, being usable on multiple foes and being 100% effective. Why would you prepare shocking grasp for this when you could just disengage anyway? You would be preparing a cantrip specifically for a situation you could handle better without using it.
I agree a Wizard has many ways to avoid melee, or more specifically get out of melee, but I don't think shocking grasp is intended to be one of those and I also don't think the class as a whole is intended to avoid ever being in contact with the enemy.
If you consider those ways you can get out of melee (misty step, thunder step ....) - if you are going to avoid melee at all costs, there is not a whole lot of reason to have them, probably not enough to prepare them given the limited number of spells you can prepare. If you are using space to prepare these spells for this, then you are doing it with the intent you will be in melee contact and able to use them.
I had always thought Hypnotic Gaze was designed because while wizards don't want ot be in melee, melee characters want to get in melee range of the wizard. If that happens a successful hypnotic gaze means they can easily get away. It is the equivalent of misty step but leaves the enemy vulnerable to the the attacks of the rest of the party. A wizard using sword burst is for similar circumstances with the hope of killing (or at least reducing the number) of enemies surrounding the wizard.
A Strength 8 dwarf with plate might get the DM checkin on encumberance as it uses over have your allowance even using the standard rules. If you are using variant encumberance it wont work at all. Going to strength 10 or 11 would lessen the issue and seem to make sense logically. (Dwarves don't need a strength of 15 for plate armor not to slow tham down but they do need more than 8)
Disengage as an action is far better than hypnotic gaze for moving out of melee. They get a save with HG. Success means you can get away, but failure means you can't. Disengage has the same action cost but no save, so why would you ever use HG for this?
As far as the Dwarf, I am not going to carry any weapons, so that is going to make me fine with the standard rules as I will not have 120 lbs of gear. That is how most tables play.
If using the variant encumbrance rule it gets pretty tricky. RAI, the whole intent of the Dwarf ability is armor does not slow him down. The strength minimums for armor only apply if you are not using encumbrance, so the rules are intended that he can move faster than someone else with the same strength wearing that armor, or more specifically that when he puts it on he is not slowed down.
As far as RAW, the rules state specifically for a Dwarf: "Your speed is not reduced by wearing heavy armor." So if donning the armor takes me from unencumbered to encumbered, RAW my speed would not change because specific beats general. I am still "encumbered" but my move is still 25 and nothing changes. If I am carrying over 15 lbs aside from the armor (80 total) then I am "heavily encumbered" , my speed is still 25 because that does not change per Dwarf, but I have disadvantage on attack rolls, strength saves and strength checks because I am "heavily encumbered".
Like I said most tables don't use the variant rule though. If the DM takes special interest due to my armor, then I am going to make sure he is meticulously applying this to other characters as well. If you start playing encumbrance, an 8-strength Ranger in a breastplate with enough arrows to last 2 days or a 16-strength Cleric or Fighter in plate makes in into "encumbered" territory pretty darn quickly.
So I have a wizard (school of conjuration, currently lvl 4) and I'm starting to notice just how detrimental the squishyness of the class is. I have low dex due to character reasons, so my AC is only 9.
I've been looking at various options to up my AC in the coming levels, and I guess the easiest one would be to perhaps multiclass into cleric (life domain)? Otherwise I could wait for the ability score improvement at lvl 8 to take the Lightly armoured feat, but it seems less viable because 1. I'd have to wait till lvl 8, and 2. I need that ability score improvement to up my INT to 20.
So I guess my question is, is it worth it taking one level of cleric and losing one level of wizard? Is it smart to do it now, or perhaps wait till later levels? Or perhaps I should take that feat instead?
What really helps is having Mage Armor and Shield always prepared. Mage Armor lasts 8 hours (so you could cast it when you wake up in the morning), giving you an AC of 13 (well, 12 for your character), and shield adds 5 to it as a reaction. Then I would try to get 10 dex as soon as possible to cancel the negative Modifier.
Note that shield lasts not for the triggering instance of damage, but until the start of your next turn. That's a 1st level spellslot well spent!
Or you yould take the Lightly Armored Feat, giving you +1 dex to make it 10, and proficiency in light armor for an 11/12 in AC permanently.
Personally, I don't like to multiclass for the sole purpose of getting "better" features, but a logical choice based of the backstory or campaign plottwists, but it's your decision in the end.
For the traditional wizard feeling, Mage Armor and Shield and staying in the back of the group is the way to go, if you wanna go Frontline wizard, armor proficiency or multiclass is the better choice (or you could change to bladesinger if the DM allows)
Thank you for the advice! While multiclassing into cleric would from a storytelling pov make sense for my character, Life domain isn't necessarily the subclass I felt fit the best, so I do feel better seeing as there are other options that wont tie me down permanently, but that I don't have to wait around for forever either.
While I do already have Shield, I will definitely learn Mage armour ASAP too!
Beyond the mage armor/shield combo, the best way to 'improve' your AC is to make is as irrelevant as possible
There are all kinds of other spells that make you harder to hit or to target. blur, blink, invisibility, etc
There are also all kinds of ways to just stay out of reach of enemies trying to hit you. misty step is a staple for a reason
If your character has a low DEX, it's always going to limit just how high your AC can get no matter what you do. Focus instead on how to avoid getting hit, so your AC never comes into play
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Mirror image is a favourite of mine for this; it requires no concentration and I tend to think of it as spending a spell slot to reduce the number of times you need to cast shield, but it's really for when you're taking a lot of fire (as Stryke89 says, the best defence is often to avoid being a target at all). Like a lot of these other additional options it takes an action so it's for those cases where you either know the fight is coming imminently and have a turn to prepare, or when you're in a bad way and think your best option is to go defensive. I'd also consider rope trick as an option; bigger enemies can't follow you inside, so as long as the rope is short enough to climb in a turn it's actually a pretty decent panic button spell, plus I just love it. 😂
Also worth keeping in mind that everybody has access to half cover and three-quarters cover if there's any in an environment; when your DM describes an area, always fish for obstacles etc. that you might be able to take cover behind if you're in danger. It's a thing that often gets overlooked in theatre of the mind games but it's such a big defensive boost that lower AC characters should take advantage of whenever possible.
Part of the reason your heavily armoured sword and board fighters and paladins can get such high basic AC's is because they're the ones that aren't likely to be benefiting from cover much (doesn't work against melee attackers), everybody with a lower AC should be trying to keep their head down if they can if your campaign has a lot of tough combat.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Mage Armor + Shield is pretty much non-negotiable for survival early on, even with Dex 9, gives you a respectable AC 17 when it matters.
What is your race, strength, wisdom, Charisma and constitution.
That will largely dictate your choices.
Here are some options:
Cleric with a heavy armor subclass is a great option, but you would need both a high strength (15+) and a 13 wisdom to wear plate
Artificer would give you 14 AC in half plate and you would not lose any spell slots.
If you have a 13 strength and high constitution (16+) multiclass to Barbarian for a 12+AC naked or 14 AC with half plate.
If you have a 13+ in charisma you can multiclass to draconic sorcerer, that will give you a 12AC, plus you can get the shield spell as one of your two spells. You also get 4 cantrips with this.
Hexblade Warlock will give you medium armor and a short rest spell slot. You can also get shield spell with this combo.
The following domains grant heavy armor proficiency:
Presenting again with only the ones worth considering for you, probably:
Since you're Conjuration-specced, I'm guessing Order would be your best bet.
i take level 1 cleric on all my wizards...for both the armor and the fact that a healing owl is awesome.
Guide to the Five Factions (PWYW)
Deck of Decks
If you're worried about a wizard's AC, you shouldn't play a wizard. I mean, everyone can play what they want, but in a traditional wizard style of play, AC isn't a priority. You have your entire list of spells to protect yourself, as well as positioning, use of the environment, etc... You should never be on the frontline, and you have tricks to get out of there if you get caught.
Your priority as a wizard is your magic. The rest is secondary or tertiary. If you can't cover your gaps with your magic, well, you're not playing your wizard the way it's supposed to be played.
Some options you have to protect yourself are shield, blur, absorb elements, silvery barbs or mirror image. But there are other options at higher levels that will make you virtually invulnerable. Of course, be careful not to focus too much on protection to the detriment of other types of spells. Generally with a couple of the spells I've listed above, you'll be fine. You just have to analyze well when to use them.
unless you want to be on the front line and you don't want magic to be your priority. The beauty of D&D is that you can build your character however you want. The whole 'you should play your class like this' is just not how some people want to play. If i want to play a one-handed rogue with 8 dexterity...I can, while still being an active and contributing part of the group. If he wants to play a wizard and worry about armor, that shouldn't be discouraged - its equally as valid as wanting to play a 20 INT wizard with a silk robe hiding in the bushes.
...all imo.
Guide to the Five Factions (PWYW)
Deck of Decks
If wizards and sorcerers use all their spells to protect themselves and stay in the back line then they are not really helping the party a whole lot.
I have no problem with an armorless back line wizard that stays out of harms way, but if you do that you should be laying down offense (i.e. the crowd pleasers). I also have no problem with Wizards that focus on defense, but they should not be on the back line. If your spells are making it hard for the enemy to hit you, then to help the party you really need the enemy to attack you so you get the utility out of those spells. A front-line Wizard in Heavy Armor or a bladesinger is an example of this - concentrating mostly on defensive spells but really sucking up attacks and keeping them off of your allies.
With the defensive back liner; the combat starts and the first thing the Wizard does is cast greater invisibility. So that is a turn lost where he isn't helping the party, then he is invisible and away from the front so he isn't drawing attacks, the fighters, clerics and Rogues are absorbing his "share" of the attacks. It gets around to his turn again and he can cast a spell to help, but he has already spent a 4th level slot and he is concentrating, so he is limited to his less effective spells which do not require concentration.
I played with a group of strangers once, we played a Goblin Ranger (me), Kobold Rogue, Human Wizard Evoker, Human Divine Sorcerer, the campaign went from 1-14. This was a pick up game where the players did not know each other before hand. By the end of it we were tired of the Sorcerer and we did not invite him to the next campaign. We felt he was dead weight, taking experience and treasure while not helping. He would go into combat and cast spells like Greater Invisibiility or Haste on himself, occasionally he would twin it and get someone else, but for the most part he concentrated on protecting himself. The Evoker was the opposite, he had no armor (only mage armor) and shield spell, but he was constantly mixing it up. If he needed to move up close to the BBEG to get the guy in the back in the AOE he would do it (and he went down quite often as a result). We (the Rogue and I) had a lot more respect for the Evoker and thought he was much more of a contributor than the Sorc.
I've heard that absurd argument so many times, I don't even know where to start.
But anyway. It is obvious that you can play the character that you want. It is so obvious that it is absurd to mention it, but I usually do it to avoid replies like yours (You can read it at the beginning of my message).
However, classes are designed one way for a reason. The wizard, in particular, is designed to be physically weak, but magically powerful. That is the basic concept, and that is why I speak of the traditional wizard. Did you read that? Well, the traditional wizard is not designed to use high AC, and doesn't need it at all. Do you want to play a wizard with a high AC, and be on the frontline? For that a specific subclass was designed: The Bladesinger.
Still want to play an atypical wizard in medium armor? Your best option is either a level in artifice, or gain proficiency in armor for your race. Do you need to do that? Not at all. But if you want to play that character, nothing is stopping you. And you can still be competent. But then why are you playing a Wizard? And if you want to play a wizard that's in melee, why don't you play a Bladesinger? In short, why complicate your life?
These questions are rhetorical. The answer is very simple: Because I want to play that. And that's fine. But it's also okay, in my opinion, to think about the fact that a Wizard doesn't really need to have AC. It's not a priority in the wizard, you shouldn't worry about it. Does that mean you can't play an armored wizard? Of course not. I repeat it again to avoid wasting time with future posts stating the obvious.
In short, the wizard is designed to use magic. That's the flavor of the class, and it should be the first thing you think of when you need to solve a problem. Can I fix this with magic?
It isn't as simple as "As wizard that stands at the back doesn't need high AC because the melee guys take all the hits". Intelligent enemies recognise both the power and the fraility of wizards and that makes them a target. Just as the party should, the enemy melee types will try to block the party melee guys so their ranged attackers can hail arrows or firebolts at the wizard. If the party frontline get into melee with the bad guys it is still often better to take the op attack or make a ranged attack at disadvantaged to try and take the wizard out first.
Once you hit level 5 cantrips do alost as much damage as a level 1 spells and while spells like fog cloud and grease can still be useful It is reasonable to use most of your level 1 slots for defence and your second and thrid for the party (note mage armor is cast out of combat, for shield you might need to consider whether your reaction might be needed for something else like counterspell, though you can not counterspell while unconcious!)
I wouldn't look at light armor, it is inferior to mage armor and you are getting to a point where 1 1st level spell per day is trivial.
If you get medium proficiency a breastplate will only increase you AC from 12 (with mage armor) to 13, but if you also get shield proficiency that goes up to 15 (if you go this route discuss with your DM how you can handle casting somantic spells when you have a focus in one had and a shield in the other, can you for example have a wand attached to some string so you can drop it, cast your spell and then use object interaction to pick it up again?). If you get half plate you can add one more to your AC at the cost of less stealth.
With a negative dex modifier you really benefit by going heavy Plate will give you and AC of 18, 20 with a shield and Forge cleric gives you the option to go to 21 (at least until everyone else has magic armor and weapons this is overkill, give the blessing of the forge to one of the martial's armor or weapon).
In reality you can only get heavy armor proficiency by multiclassing into cleric (ignoring options like take 3 feats). This requires 13 wisdom, it does NOT require 15 strength though failing to meet the strength requirement reduces your movement speed by 10ft (unless you are a dwarf), that is a significant penalty but one you may choose to accept.
If you choose to take a level of cleric go with whatever domain fits your character, while Quindraco may have picked out the most optimised domains all of them can provide something useful at times (for example with a level of war cleric after casting firebolt you can throw a javelin as a bonus action which could be good if you have high strength) you are really taking cleric for heavy armore proficiency anyway.
Whatever your AC wont have the HP to be not be frail. If the enemy casts fireball on you is probably wont end well!
I do think I need to point out that you need to be within 5 feet of a creature to use the enchantment wizard's signature ability and that you need to stay there if you want to get more than 1 round out of it. Also spells like sword burst and shocking grasp pretty much need to be used in melee. So the idea that wizards are designed to always stay out of melee is not supported by the spells or subclass abilities, many of which predate the bladesinger.
In any case playing an 8-strength Mountain Dwarf Enchantment Wizard in Plate is pretty awesome. You can't do that well with a bladesinger because of the armor restrictions on bladesong (you can still do it and you can be effective, but it is certainly an off theme build). A 1-level cleric dip is the best way to do this combo, and you won't even lose spell slots. You can also do it with the heavily armored feat without multiclassing too.
My next build is going to be a multiclass Enchantment Wizard-Order Cleric. Admittedly, he is going to be more cleric than wizard until 16th level.
The reason I want to do this combo is because I want to be able to use hypnotic gaze and then cast enchantment spells like Tasha's Mind Whip, psychic lance or synaptic static as a bonus action while using my action for hypnotic gaze. At first glance it would seem to be very MAD, needing intelligence for the saves and wisdom for max uses of embodiment of law, however I can do this effectively with an 8 in both dexterity and strength. I am planning to go completely weaponless on this build.
Sometimes it is difficult to try to explain something when the interlocutor does not want to understand it. So I'm going to leave it here. Whoever wants to understand what I mean, perfect. Whoever wants to try to reinvent the wheel, that's up to them.
Some people create their characters based on role play and some on trying to optimise. That is fine as long as everyone in the party is on board, a single highly optimised player in a group can outshine the other characters making the came less fun for them.
I had always thought Hypnotic Gaze was designed because while wizards don't want ot be in melee, melee characters want to get in melee range of the wizard. If that happens a successful hypnotic gaze means they can easily get away. It is the equivalent of misty step but leaves the enemy vulnerable to the the attacks of the rest of the party. A wizard using sword burst is for similar circumstances with the hope of killing (or at least reducing the number) of enemies surrounding the wizard.
A Strength 8 dwarf with plate might get the DM checkin on encumberance as it uses over have your allowance even using the standard rules. If you are using variant encumberance it wont work at all. Going to strength 10 or 11 would lessen the issue and seem to make sense logically. (Dwarves don't need a strength of 15 for plate armor not to slow tham down but they do need more than 8)
A wizard has many ways to get out of melee if he doesn't want to be there. Shocking Grasp, for example, which is for that (not to be your usual attack). Misty step, of course. And other options depending on the situation, and your choice of spells. That is the key when you play a wizard to choose your spells well. That's your strength, and the reason you want to play a wizard, right? For his spell list.
In any case, if a wizard doesn't want to be in melee, they have plenty of ways to avoid it. Obviously most of his solutions derive from his magic which is what makes the class what it is.
Shocking grasp only works for this if you hit, which is far from certain and limited to a single enemy. This makes it an extremely weak way to disengage. Spells like Thunderstep or misty step are effectivefor that.
Disengage works a lot better shocking grasp, being usable on multiple foes and being 100% effective. Why would you prepare shocking grasp for this when you could just disengage anyway? You would be preparing a cantrip specifically for a situation you could handle better without using it.
I agree a Wizard has many ways to avoid melee, or more specifically get out of melee, but I don't think shocking grasp is intended to be one of those and I also don't think the class as a whole is intended to avoid ever being in contact with the enemy.
If you consider those ways you can get out of melee (misty step, thunder step ....) - if you are going to avoid melee at all costs, there is not a whole lot of reason to have them, probably not enough to prepare them given the limited number of spells you can prepare. If you are using space to prepare these spells for this, then you are doing it with the intent you will be in melee contact and able to use them.
Disengage as an action is far better than hypnotic gaze for moving out of melee. They get a save with HG. Success means you can get away, but failure means you can't. Disengage has the same action cost but no save, so why would you ever use HG for this?
As far as the Dwarf, I am not going to carry any weapons, so that is going to make me fine with the standard rules as I will not have 120 lbs of gear. That is how most tables play.
If using the variant encumbrance rule it gets pretty tricky. RAI, the whole intent of the Dwarf ability is armor does not slow him down. The strength minimums for armor only apply if you are not using encumbrance, so the rules are intended that he can move faster than someone else with the same strength wearing that armor, or more specifically that when he puts it on he is not slowed down.
As far as RAW, the rules state specifically for a Dwarf: "Your speed is not reduced by wearing heavy armor." So if donning the armor takes me from unencumbered to encumbered, RAW my speed would not change because specific beats general. I am still "encumbered" but my move is still 25 and nothing changes. If I am carrying over 15 lbs aside from the armor (80 total) then I am "heavily encumbered" , my speed is still 25 because that does not change per Dwarf, but I have disadvantage on attack rolls, strength saves and strength checks because I am "heavily encumbered".
Like I said most tables don't use the variant rule though. If the DM takes special interest due to my armor, then I am going to make sure he is meticulously applying this to other characters as well. If you start playing encumbrance, an 8-strength Ranger in a breastplate with enough arrows to last 2 days or a 16-strength Cleric or Fighter in plate makes in into "encumbered" territory pretty darn quickly.