Disengage has the same action cost but no save, so why would you ever use HG for this?
Because you have a chance -- perhaps a very good one, depending on whether you think the target is good at WIS saves -- of incapacitating them, rather than simply disengaging and leaving them with their actions/attacks?
I mean, this question was answered by jegpeg before you even asked it, and I'd think you'd be in favor of them taking that chance considering you were complaining about casters who do nothing but save their own skins just a handful of comments ago
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)
I agree that a wizard has better ways to protect himself than getting a better AC. However, if you can improve your AC, why not? On the other hand it is obvious that the class is designed to avoid being in melee. Of course many wizard builds can be built to be in melee (even without being a bladesinger), but the class is not designed to be in melee. Are we really arguing this point?
Disengage has the same action cost but no save, so why would you ever use HG for this?
Because you have a chance -- perhaps a very good one, depending on whether you think the target is good at WIS saves -- of incapacitating them, rather than simply disengaging and leaving them with their actions/attacks?
And you have a chance of it not working and being stuck there for another turn or taking an opportunity attack, which means it is not effective if you need to get out of melee and if you built your wizard "squishy" you have a really good chance of getting hit hard. Also Wisdom is an ok target stat for saves, it is better than constitution but it is not great. It is not as good as intelligence and is not any better than dexterity and there are other things all wizards can get that would accomplish this on one of those two saves.
This logic works both ways too - the Enchantment wizard that is standing in the back has the exact same chance of walking up to the front and incapacitating the bad guy, as the enchantment wizard that is going to use it to escape. If you are going to assume HG is going to work then there is no reason not to approach the enemy.
I mean, this question was answered by jegpeg before you even asked it, and I'd think you'd be in favor of them taking that chance considering you were complaining about casters who do nothing but save their own skins just a handful of comments ago
I would, but he is not doing it to escape then, he is doing it to incapacitate the guy, and that is how every enchantment wizard I have played or played with used this ability. I don't think I have ever seen an enchantment wizard use this for the purpose of trying to escape, they will use thunderstep for that or use misty step, do it automatically and then still have a full action.
The real power in HG is that there is no save after the first one as long as you keep using your action, but you need to stay within 5 feet to do that. The fact there is no save every turn makes it more powerful than most other save or suck, especially ones you get at early levels. If you are only using it for one turn you are wasting it, because there are a bunch of ways to do that.
This logic works both ways too - the Enchantment wizard that is standing in the back has the exact same chance of walking up to the front and incapacitating the bad guy, as the enchantment wizard that is going to use it to escape. If you are going to assume HG is going to work then there is no reason not to approach the enemy.
Hypnotic Gaze only works against one target. If you're at the back, you likely have a variety of spells that affect multiple targets available to you. That is, in fact, one of the biggest reasons to hang back as a wizard -- to keep your options as open as possible. There aren't many scenarios where moving up into melee range to affect a single target is your best option -- but yes, in those cases you might well use Hypnotic Gaze
I have no idea what you're even getting at with "assuming it works". No one's doing that
I would, but he is not doing it to escape then, he is doing it to incapacitate the guy, and that is how every enchantment wizard I have played or played with used this ability. I don't think I have ever seen an enchantment wizard use this for the purpose of trying to escape
The wizard is using it to keep themselves from being attacked -- which is a pretty common usage for any charm spell/effect -- and to help the rest of the party deal with the threat
BTW, "escape" doesn't just mean "run away". If you prevent someone from attacking you, you've escaped being attacked
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)
I agree that a wizard has better ways to protect himself than getting a better AC. However, if you can improve your AC, why not? On the other hand it is obvious that the class is designed to avoid being in melee. Of course many wizard builds can be built to be in melee (even without being a bladesinger), but the class is not designed to be in melee. Are we really arguing this point?
I think the class is designed and intended to be flexible and played many different ways. I think that is the same thing is true of the Ranger, a lot of Ranger builds will be weaker in melee range, but that is not the same as saying the Ranger class is not designed to be in melee.
As I noted earlier, there are many spells and abilities that require you to be in melee or near the front. Shocking Grasp, Vampiric touch, Thunderclap, Swordburst .... Lighning Lure will actually force a distant the target into melee range with you. Anything that has a cone is going to drive you to the front to use effectively.
The wizard is using it to keep themselves from being attacked -- which is a pretty common usage for any charm spell/effect -- and to help the rest of the party deal with the threat
BTW, "escape" doesn't just mean "run away". If you prevent someone from attacking you, you've escaped being attacked
I agree with this, but my argument is to refute the statement that HG exists so Wizards can "get away" from melee. This would be a very weak subclass ability if that was the designed and intended use.
Also HG does only work against one enemy, but instinctive charm also works against 1 attack per round (until that enemy saves). So an enchantment wizard of 6th level or more has another ability that does not use resources, that he can use to protect himself from other nearby enemies. Moreover instinctive charm only works against enemies within 30 feet, so it is actually more effective against melee attackers than ranged attackers and the party will get more use out of it if the wizard is being targeted. It may not be the best play if the enemies have multiattack or if there are multiples attacking you, but it is another way to use up an enemy action and in this case use it to damage other enemie and it works better if you are attacked.
I agree that a wizard has better ways to protect himself than getting a better AC. However, if you can improve your AC, why not? On the other hand it is obvious that the class is designed to avoid being in melee. Of course many wizard builds can be built to be in melee (even without being a bladesinger), but the class is not designed to be in melee. Are we really arguing this point?
I think the class is designed and intended to be flexible and played many different ways. I think that is the same thing is true of the Ranger, a lot of Ranger builds will be weaker in melee range, but that is not the same as saying the Ranger class is not designed to be in melee.
As I noted earlier, there are many spells and abilities that require you to be in melee or near the front. Shocking Grasp, Vampiric touch, Thunderclap, Swordburst .... Lighning Lure will actually force a distant the target into melee range with you. Anything that has a cone is going to drive you to the front to use effectively.
But just because you have some melee spells, or very close range spells, as well as spells that physically empower you to attack melee (Tenser transformation, for example), doesn't mean the class is designed for that. In fact I don't think it's very optimal to base your melee wizard on Shocking Grasp, for example. That's more of a situational cantrip in case you get caught in melee. But not for you to get into melee yelling: "Don't worry, I have Shocking Grasp to finish them off".
Anyway, what you are right about is that wizards are flexible and adaptable, and that they have a spell for every situation. Also to be in melee, either voluntarily or accidentally.
Regarding the Ranger, I don't see anything in their design that makes them bad for melee. I would never say that the ranger is a class designed not to be in melee, frankly. On the contrary, it seems to me a class that by design can work well in melee and with ranged weapons.
But just because you have some melee spells, or very close range spells, as well as spells that physically empower you to attack melee (Tenser transformation, for example), doesn't mean the class is designed for that. In fact I don't think it's very optimal to base your melee wizard on Shocking Grasp, for example. That's more of a situational cantrip in case you get caught in melee. But not for you to get into melee yelling: "Don't worry, I have Shocking Grasp to finish them off".
There is nothing in the wizard design that makes them bad at close range either, spells are part of the wizard class design and Wizards with proper spells are VERY survivable and can survive on the front line longer than many classes.
Tensors transformation is not a spell that makes wizards survivable, it is a spell that makes them a LOT weaker when inside melee range, while doing more damage with weapons and getting extra hps but losign the vast majority of their defensive abilities. If you cast TT and then go into melee you will generally die sooner than a wizard who starts melee without anything more than mage armor cast on himself and a lot faster than a wizard who uses something like haste or blur. Spells like protection from good and evil, absorb elements, shield and contingency all substantially increase your durability and they are part of the basic wizard class as designed. I used a Ranger as an example, because a Wizard using spells like these will generally survive longer in melee range than a Ranger of the same level.
A 5th level Ranger has 12hps more than a 5th level wizard with the same constitution, the spells a wizard gets WAY more than make up for this difference. False life alone on a 2nd level slot puts him ahead of the Ranger in hps without using a single other spell to defend himself. Put a Ranger and a Wizard of the same level into melee range with the same enemies taking the same attacks and suffering the same effects and the Ranger will generally hit 0 hps before the Wizard will, and that is without even considering subclass abilities from abjuration, enchantment, war wizard or bladesinger - all of which will substantially increase survivability beyond the baseline. An Abjuration Wizard effectively has more hit points than a Ranger as soon as he casts mage armor at the start of the day and if he goes through those extra hit points he gets 2 more back every time he casts shield.
I am not suggesting you design a build around shocking grasp, but it is not just shocking grasp: sword burst, thunderclap, booming blade, green flame blade and lighting lure are either used at melee ranges exclusively or put the wizard into melee range when you use them. That is 6 cantrips that are designed ONLY for melee range out of I think 14 total damaging cantrips. That is nearly half of the damaging cantrips they can choose from, and it includes the 4 best cantrips available to Wizards in terms of total damage delivered.
If you're worried about a wizard's AC, you shouldn't play a wizard.
The following wizard subclasses benefit extremely from worrying about their AC (remember that AC has increasing returns - the higher your AC already is, the more valuable the next point of AC is):
Bladesinger: Designed for high AC specifically.
War Magic: Designed for high AC specifically.
Abjuration: Starting at level 6, the Ward is significantly more useful the less often the Wizard is hit, so the hit point pool can be used to instead protect others.
Illusion: The L10 benefit is better with higher AC to help you avoid consuming it early.
Special Mention: Chronurgy: Forcing an attacker to re-roll attacks is better against higher AC targets.
So 5/13 or, without the deeply weird and often banned Wildemount subclasses, 4/11 of all wizards are radically better with higher AC. Have you ever tried playing a Mountain Dwarf Abjurer? If not, I highly recommend it.
If you're worried about a wizard's AC, you shouldn't play a wizard.
The following wizard subclasses benefit extremely from worrying about their AC (remember that AC has increasing returns - the higher your AC already is, the more valuable the next point of AC is):
Bladesinger: Designed for high AC specifically.
War Magic: Designed for high AC specifically.
Abjuration: Starting at level 6, the Ward is significantly more useful the less often the Wizard is hit, so the hit point pool can be used to instead protect others.
Illusion: The L10 benefit is better with higher AC to help you avoid consuming it early.
Special Mention: Chronurgy: Forcing an attacker to re-roll attacks is better against higher AC targets.
So 5/13 or, without the deeply weird and often banned Wildemount subclasses, 4/11 of all wizards are radically better with higher AC. Have you ever tried playing a Mountain Dwarf Abjurer? If not, I highly recommend it.
Except for the bladesinger, which I already mentioned in my comment, and that the AC comes from its subclass, the rest you name do not need a high AC to work properly. Anyway, what I was saying is that the Wizard has many ways to protect himself with his magic (for example, everything that is mentioned in the post immediately above yours). That's why that phrase you quote out of context. Obviously if your AC doesn't slow down your progress (for example by multiclassing), it's always good. However I see a lot of people worried about the wizard's AC, doing weird things to get it, and they don't think that the solution is in your spell list. And not just with armor mage. You have a ton of defensive spells, and I'm surprised it's not the first place a wizard player looks. That's why my question is often why are you playing a Wizard?
Step 6 (optional): equip the melee skellys with armor (probably medium or heavy) and give the ranged skellys longbows.
The skeletons have disadvantage on attacks if you put them in any armor and if you put them in heavy armor their move is only 20.
RAW you should also give them shortbows, not longbows as they would lose their proficiency bonus if they used longbows.
Debatable their description expressly says they can wear armor and wield weapons. A DM can feel free to rule that as sure you can put it on but its untrained, but I don't think that is the only reading you can get from that. Calling it RAW is a stretch imo. Its looking at the general rule on monster proficiency and ignoring what the skeleton description says. You can interpret that section in multiple ways sure, but neither is RAW.
A lot of this depends on your table. At a table of optimizers, where the DM tools tactics up for it all the I use my spells as I am a wizard crowd would likely be dead before they hit level 5. At a table with a more casual DM, roll in the back and try to stay out of combat and use defensive spells sparingly to get by is totally viable.
In addition to the other comments re mage armor and shield.
False Life is a handy way to get a pseudo-heal (and a way to prep for combat). It's not very efficient to use it with higher level slots, but there will be times when your battered wizard needs to patch themselves up with it.
Don't be afraid to use Dodge, Dash or Disengage if you have a strong concentration spell up that will tip the combat.
As you gain higher levels, look out for concentration-free summon spells which can bolster your forces - raise dead,tiny servant, find familiar and invisible servant. Some of them can't attack, but they can still block the enemy and suck up attacks. Familiars are expensive to re-summon at 10GP, though in a major battle, you still might want one on the field as a distraction.
False Life is a handy way to get a pseudo-heal (and a way to prep for combat). It's not very efficient to use it with higher level slots, but there will be times when your battered wizard needs to patch themselves up with it.
I'm a big fan of false life for caster durability; I used this on a sorcerer and he barely took any damage to his actual hit-points, though sorcerers have the added benefit of being able to re-cast it during a fight as a bonus action via Quickened Spell. Still, the hour duration means it's easy to have it ready before most fights with little chance of wasting it; personally I found 4th-level to be the sweet spot for a 20-23 damage buffer, as I didn't actually use many 4th-level spells that I couldn't upcast.
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.
If you're worried about a wizard's AC, you shouldn't play a wizard.
The following wizard subclasses benefit extremely from worrying about their AC (remember that AC has increasing returns - the higher your AC already is, the more valuable the next point of AC is):
Bladesinger: Designed for high AC specifically.
War Magic: Designed for high AC specifically.
Abjuration: Starting at level 6, the Ward is significantly more useful the less often the Wizard is hit, so the hit point pool can be used to instead protect others.
Illusion: The L10 benefit is better with higher AC to help you avoid consuming it early.
Special Mention: Chronurgy: Forcing an attacker to re-roll attacks is better against higher AC targets.
So 5/13 or, without the deeply weird and often banned Wildemount subclasses, 4/11 of all wizards are radically better with higher AC. Have you ever tried playing a Mountain Dwarf Abjurer? If not, I highly recommend it.
Except for the bladesinger, which I already mentioned in my comment, and that the AC comes from its subclass, the rest you name do not need a high AC to work properly. Anyway, what I was saying is that the Wizard has many ways to protect himself with his magic (for example, everything that is mentioned in the post immediately above yours). That's why that phrase you quote out of context. Obviously if your AC doesn't slow down your progress (for example by multiclassing), it's always good. However I see a lot of people worried about the wizard's AC, doing weird things to get it, and they don't think that the solution is in your spell list. And not just with armor mage. You have a ton of defensive spells, and I'm surprised it's not the first place a wizard player looks. That's why my question is often why are you playing a Wizard?
This feels like bad advice. Like "Why are you playing a wizard?" Is a bit of a weird question. We all know the answer. Fireball.
Problem is if you're dying too fast, you can't cast fireball while dead. So we gotta worry about staying alive as a wizard so we can fireball more. Obviously.
But the thing is, if you're spending your spell slots on things like blink to keep safe you're not using them on fireball.
That's a BIG problem. Because, fireball.
So what is a wizard to do? Well. We need a way to increase our survivability that doesn't get in the way of our spellcasting ability. What does that?
Easy. A level dip into a spellcasting class that gives armor proficiency, maybe a handful of useful spells, and most importantly no loss of spell slot progression. Because we want those slots for... you know, fireball.
That makes cleric a pretty sweet option. They get some neat perks at 1st level. Heal spells, which are great to spend those low level can't-be-fireball slots on. And! Medium or Heavy armor plus a shield. That's dope. Huge AC boost for no spell slots cost. Win.
We just became an even betterer wizard than before! Because we can more reliably fireball. And only fireball, all the things, and not get stopped so easily when we do. Much success.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
This feels like bad advice. Like "Why are you playing a wizard?" Is a bit of a weird question. We all know the answer. Fireball.
Problem is if you're dying too fast, you can't cast fireball while dead. So we gotta worry about staying alive as a wizard so we can fireball more. Obviously.
But the thing is, if you're spending your spell slots on things like blink to keep safe you're not using them on fireball.
That's a BIG problem. Because, fireball.
So what is a wizard to do? Well. We need a way to increase our survivability that doesn't get in the way of our spellcasting ability. What does that?
Easy. A level dip into a spellcasting class that gives armor proficiency, maybe a handful of useful spells, and most importantly no loss of spell slot progression. Because we want those slots for... you know, fireball.
That makes cleric a pretty sweet option. They get some neat perks at 1st level. Heal spells, which are great to spend those low level can't-be-fireball slots on. And! Medium or Heavy armor plus a shield. That's dope. Huge AC boost for no spell slots cost. Win.
We just became an even betterer wizard than before! Because we can more reliably fireball. And only fireball, all the things, and not get stopped so easily when we do. Much success.
If you are looking for a 1st level dip, it is hard to look past Artificer. Medium armor + shield, CON saves, more cantrips and spells that key off INT and also no spell slot progression delay because FIREBALL!!!! =D
This feels like bad advice. Like "Why are you playing a wizard?" Is a bit of a weird question. We all know the answer. Fireball.
Problem is if you're dying too fast, you can't cast fireball while dead. So we gotta worry about staying alive as a wizard so we can fireball more. Obviously.
But the thing is, if you're spending your spell slots on things like blink to keep safe you're not using them on fireball.
That's a BIG problem. Because, fireball.
So what is a wizard to do? Well. We need a way to increase our survivability that doesn't get in the way of our spellcasting ability. What does that?
Easy. A level dip into a spellcasting class that gives armor proficiency, maybe a handful of useful spells, and most importantly no loss of spell slot progression. Because we want those slots for... you know, fireball.
That makes cleric a pretty sweet option. They get some neat perks at 1st level. Heal spells, which are great to spend those low level can't-be-fireball slots on. And! Medium or Heavy armor plus a shield. That's dope. Huge AC boost for no spell slots cost. Win.
We just became an even betterer wizard than before! Because we can more reliably fireball. And only fireball, all the things, and not get stopped so easily when we do. Much success.
If you are looking for a 1st level dip, it is hard to look past Artificer. Medium armor + shield, CON saves, more cantrips and spells that key off INT and also no spell slot progression delay because FIREBALL!!!! =D
Yeah artificer is absolutely the goto option if you didn't plan the dip in advance, because it only needs the Int, which the wizard already has. But you can get more out of cleric if you can source that 13 wisdom score from the start. Guidance, Mending, Light, all don't use your stat. And having Healing Word does but you weren't going to heal a lot with it anyway, and bless isn't wis dependent either. That 1st level perk you get from cleric subclass is the potential tiebreaker though. Depending on which subclass it could be playstyle defining. This also opens up the Heavy armor option, and a fullplate + shield wearing wizard is kinda scary.
If you wanted to get really armored up, with artificer, you'd got to Artificer 3, to subclass armorer. Then you can like bonk people and walk around in magical power armor and whatnot. But this, this much dip costs you some slots. So. Less fireballs 😞
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Because you have a chance -- perhaps a very good one, depending on whether you think the target is good at WIS saves -- of incapacitating them, rather than simply disengaging and leaving them with their actions/attacks?
I mean, this question was answered by jegpeg before you even asked it, and I'd think you'd be in favor of them taking that chance considering you were complaining about casters who do nothing but save their own skins just a handful of comments ago
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)
I agree that a wizard has better ways to protect himself than getting a better AC. However, if you can improve your AC, why not?
On the other hand it is obvious that the class is designed to avoid being in melee. Of course many wizard builds can be built to be in melee (even without being a bladesinger), but the class is not designed to be in melee. Are we really arguing this point?
And you have a chance of it not working and being stuck there for another turn or taking an opportunity attack, which means it is not effective if you need to get out of melee and if you built your wizard "squishy" you have a really good chance of getting hit hard. Also Wisdom is an ok target stat for saves, it is better than constitution but it is not great. It is not as good as intelligence and is not any better than dexterity and there are other things all wizards can get that would accomplish this on one of those two saves.
This logic works both ways too - the Enchantment wizard that is standing in the back has the exact same chance of walking up to the front and incapacitating the bad guy, as the enchantment wizard that is going to use it to escape. If you are going to assume HG is going to work then there is no reason not to approach the enemy.
I would, but he is not doing it to escape then, he is doing it to incapacitate the guy, and that is how every enchantment wizard I have played or played with used this ability. I don't think I have ever seen an enchantment wizard use this for the purpose of trying to escape, they will use thunderstep for that or use misty step, do it automatically and then still have a full action.
The real power in HG is that there is no save after the first one as long as you keep using your action, but you need to stay within 5 feet to do that. The fact there is no save every turn makes it more powerful than most other save or suck, especially ones you get at early levels. If you are only using it for one turn you are wasting it, because there are a bunch of ways to do that.
The wizard is using it to keep themselves from being attacked -- which is a pretty common usage for any charm spell/effect -- and to help the rest of the party deal with the threat
BTW, "escape" doesn't just mean "run away". If you prevent someone from attacking you, you've escaped being attacked
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)
I think the class is designed and intended to be flexible and played many different ways. I think that is the same thing is true of the Ranger, a lot of Ranger builds will be weaker in melee range, but that is not the same as saying the Ranger class is not designed to be in melee.
As I noted earlier, there are many spells and abilities that require you to be in melee or near the front. Shocking Grasp, Vampiric touch, Thunderclap, Swordburst .... Lighning Lure will actually force a distant the target into melee range with you. Anything that has a cone is going to drive you to the front to use effectively.
I agree with this, but my argument is to refute the statement that HG exists so Wizards can "get away" from melee. This would be a very weak subclass ability if that was the designed and intended use.
Also HG does only work against one enemy, but instinctive charm also works against 1 attack per round (until that enemy saves). So an enchantment wizard of 6th level or more has another ability that does not use resources, that he can use to protect himself from other nearby enemies. Moreover instinctive charm only works against enemies within 30 feet, so it is actually more effective against melee attackers than ranged attackers and the party will get more use out of it if the wizard is being targeted. It may not be the best play if the enemies have multiattack or if there are multiples attacking you, but it is another way to use up an enemy action and in this case use it to damage other enemie and it works better if you are attacked.
But just because you have some melee spells, or very close range spells, as well as spells that physically empower you to attack melee (Tenser transformation, for example), doesn't mean the class is designed for that. In fact I don't think it's very optimal to base your melee wizard on Shocking Grasp, for example. That's more of a situational cantrip in case you get caught in melee. But not for you to get into melee yelling: "Don't worry, I have Shocking Grasp to finish them off".
Anyway, what you are right about is that wizards are flexible and adaptable, and that they have a spell for every situation. Also to be in melee, either voluntarily or accidentally.
Regarding the Ranger, I don't see anything in their design that makes them bad for melee. I would never say that the ranger is a class designed not to be in melee, frankly. On the contrary, it seems to me a class that by design can work well in melee and with ranged weapons.
There is nothing in the wizard design that makes them bad at close range either, spells are part of the wizard class design and Wizards with proper spells are VERY survivable and can survive on the front line longer than many classes.
Tensors transformation is not a spell that makes wizards survivable, it is a spell that makes them a LOT weaker when inside melee range, while doing more damage with weapons and getting extra hps but losign the vast majority of their defensive abilities. If you cast TT and then go into melee you will generally die sooner than a wizard who starts melee without anything more than mage armor cast on himself and a lot faster than a wizard who uses something like haste or blur. Spells like protection from good and evil, absorb elements, shield and contingency all substantially increase your durability and they are part of the basic wizard class as designed. I used a Ranger as an example, because a Wizard using spells like these will generally survive longer in melee range than a Ranger of the same level.
A 5th level Ranger has 12hps more than a 5th level wizard with the same constitution, the spells a wizard gets WAY more than make up for this difference. False life alone on a 2nd level slot puts him ahead of the Ranger in hps without using a single other spell to defend himself. Put a Ranger and a Wizard of the same level into melee range with the same enemies taking the same attacks and suffering the same effects and the Ranger will generally hit 0 hps before the Wizard will, and that is without even considering subclass abilities from abjuration, enchantment, war wizard or bladesinger - all of which will substantially increase survivability beyond the baseline. An Abjuration Wizard effectively has more hit points than a Ranger as soon as he casts mage armor at the start of the day and if he goes through those extra hit points he gets 2 more back every time he casts shield.
I am not suggesting you design a build around shocking grasp, but it is not just shocking grasp: sword burst, thunderclap, booming blade, green flame blade and lighting lure are either used at melee ranges exclusively or put the wizard into melee range when you use them. That is 6 cantrips that are designed ONLY for melee range out of I think 14 total damaging cantrips. That is nearly half of the damaging cantrips they can choose from, and it includes the 4 best cantrips available to Wizards in terms of total damage delivered.
The following wizard subclasses benefit extremely from worrying about their AC (remember that AC has increasing returns - the higher your AC already is, the more valuable the next point of AC is):
So 5/13 or, without the deeply weird and often banned Wildemount subclasses, 4/11 of all wizards are radically better with higher AC. Have you ever tried playing a Mountain Dwarf Abjurer? If not, I highly recommend it.
Except for the bladesinger, which I already mentioned in my comment, and that the AC comes from its subclass, the rest you name do not need a high AC to work properly.
Anyway, what I was saying is that the Wizard has many ways to protect himself with his magic (for example, everything that is mentioned in the post immediately above yours). That's why that phrase you quote out of context. Obviously if your AC doesn't slow down your progress (for example by multiclassing), it's always good. However I see a lot of people worried about the wizard's AC, doing weird things to get it, and they don't think that the solution is in your spell list. And not just with armor mage. You have a ton of defensive spells, and I'm surprised it's not the first place a wizard player looks. That's why my question is often why are you playing a Wizard?
(Warning-this is a shameless advertisement for the necromantic party)
Step 1:become a necromancer
Step 2:wait for your barbarian to stomp some bandits into paste
Step 3: have your unseen servant skin them (you’ll get dirty looks from the cleric but it’s worth it)
Step 4:use animate dead to bring them back as skeletons
Step 5: whenever combat starts have half of them run to the frontline to help the melee ppl and the other half stay behind to protect you
Step 6 (optional): equip the melee skellys with armor (probably medium or heavy) and give the ranged skellys longbows.
The skeletons have disadvantage on attacks if you put them in any armor and if you put them in heavy armor their move is only 20.
RAW you should also give them shortbows, not longbows as they would lose their proficiency bonus if they used longbows.
Debatable their description expressly says they can wear armor and wield weapons. A DM can feel free to rule that as sure you can put it on but its untrained, but I don't think that is the only reading you can get from that. Calling it RAW is a stretch imo. Its looking at the general rule on monster proficiency and ignoring what the skeleton description says. You can interpret that section in multiple ways sure, but neither is RAW.
A lot of this depends on your table. At a table of optimizers, where the DM tools tactics up for it all the I use my spells as I am a wizard crowd would likely be dead before they hit level 5. At a table with a more casual DM, roll in the back and try to stay out of combat and use defensive spells sparingly to get by is totally viable.
In addition to the other comments re mage armor and shield.
False Life is a handy way to get a pseudo-heal (and a way to prep for combat). It's not very efficient to use it with higher level slots, but there will be times when your battered wizard needs to patch themselves up with it.
Don't be afraid to use Dodge, Dash or Disengage if you have a strong concentration spell up that will tip the combat.
As you gain higher levels, look out for concentration-free summon spells which can bolster your forces - raise dead, tiny servant, find familiar and invisible servant. Some of them can't attack, but they can still block the enemy and suck up attacks. Familiars are expensive to re-summon at 10GP, though in a major battle, you still might want one on the field as a distraction.
I'm a big fan of false life for caster durability; I used this on a sorcerer and he barely took any damage to his actual hit-points, though sorcerers have the added benefit of being able to re-cast it during a fight as a bonus action via Quickened Spell. Still, the hour duration means it's easy to have it ready before most fights with little chance of wasting it; personally I found 4th-level to be the sweet spot for a 20-23 damage buffer, as I didn't actually use many 4th-level spells that I couldn't upcast.
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.
This feels like bad advice. Like "Why are you playing a wizard?" Is a bit of a weird question. We all know the answer. Fireball.
Problem is if you're dying too fast, you can't cast fireball while dead. So we gotta worry about staying alive as a wizard so we can fireball more. Obviously.
But the thing is, if you're spending your spell slots on things like blink to keep safe you're not using them on fireball.
That's a BIG problem. Because, fireball.
So what is a wizard to do? Well. We need a way to increase our survivability that doesn't get in the way of our spellcasting ability. What does that?
Easy. A level dip into a spellcasting class that gives armor proficiency, maybe a handful of useful spells, and most importantly no loss of spell slot progression. Because we want those slots for... you know, fireball.
That makes cleric a pretty sweet option. They get some neat perks at 1st level. Heal spells, which are great to spend those low level can't-be-fireball slots on. And! Medium or Heavy armor plus a shield. That's dope. Huge AC boost for no spell slots cost. Win.
We just became an even betterer wizard than before! Because we can more reliably fireball. And only fireball, all the things, and not get stopped so easily when we do. Much success.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
If you are looking for a 1st level dip, it is hard to look past Artificer. Medium armor + shield, CON saves, more cantrips and spells that key off INT and also no spell slot progression delay because FIREBALL!!!! =D
Yeah artificer is absolutely the goto option if you didn't plan the dip in advance, because it only needs the Int, which the wizard already has. But you can get more out of cleric if you can source that 13 wisdom score from the start. Guidance, Mending, Light, all don't use your stat. And having Healing Word does but you weren't going to heal a lot with it anyway, and bless isn't wis dependent either. That 1st level perk you get from cleric subclass is the potential tiebreaker though. Depending on which subclass it could be playstyle defining. This also opens up the Heavy armor option, and a fullplate + shield wearing wizard is kinda scary.
If you wanted to get really armored up, with artificer, you'd got to Artificer 3, to subclass armorer. Then you can like bonk people and walk around in magical power armor and whatnot. But this, this much dip costs you some slots. So. Less fireballs 😞
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.