If you want to be the best character in your party for Arcana checks, you probably don't want to be a Wizard with RAW.
With the new Divine Order and Primal Order options, both Clerics and Druids can add both their WIS and INT to Arcana checks, even if they aren't trained in it. What's weirder is that these features stack, which means that a Level 2 Wizard might have Expertise in Arcana and have a max of +7 to Arcana, where a Cleric 1/Druid 1 can realistically have +6 from WIS bonuses, +2 from Proficiency, and +~2 for INT if it isn't a dump stat. So they could have +10 at level 2, or either class can easily get +7 without multiclassing. It just seems supremely odd that the one class explicitly dedicated to the Arcana skill has to take proficiency and expertise to get the same strength a level 1 Druid or Cleric has, and has no way without multiclassing to eclipse them. Hell, the Druid or Cleric could use ASIs to increase both WIS and INT over time, meaning they could get up to +11 without multiclassing or +16 with multiclassing, increasing further if expertise is taken.
To further dump on Wizards, both Clerics and Druids also get this boost to their own iconic stat (Religion and Nature, respectively), so they aren't even trading anything for being the most accomplished scholar in Arcana.
My question: Would you introduce a houserule to increase wizards' scaling for Arcana? Especially since they get no new class features from level 5 to level 18, it seems like an appropriate feature to grant around level 10-12, when lots of other classes get big boosts to damage or utility. Or do you think this would this be overkill?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Stories never end. They merely mark the beginning of the next chapter." -Rory Bristol "Failure means you've tried." -RB
I wouldn't houserule it. I don't think it's a big deal. Just because something can happen doesn't mean it will; or at least not often. If a Cleric or Druid is going to use ASIs on INT...I mean...they're mega nerfing their character, so be my guest. Same with a Cleric/Druid multiclass. It's not an issue. Wizards will almost always have the highest Arcana in the party. If some fringe cases are different it doesn't really matter.
For example, A Fey Wanderer Ranger can be better at Charisma checks than pretty much any other character. Is it a problem that the highest Performance possible is on a Ranger and not a Bard? No, of course not. If the Ranger wants to waste ASIs on Charisma, then let them have it.
So yeah, I don't think this will come up often, and in the rare cases it does, it really isn't a big deal. I wouldn't say "Wizards are worse at Arcana than Clerics and Druids", that's realistically not true.
I think I would agree with you if Druids used their Wisdom instead of Int. As it stands, you don't even need ASIs to have a better Arcana than a Wizard, because Int is often not a dump stat anyway, because Nature relies on it, I wouldn't say that Fey Wanderer is a good analogy either, because that's a subclass that is trading away other benefits to get that perk, and they have a number of useful other choices.The fact that Wizards can't make any meaningful choice to get the same boost to their most iconic skill is... just sad.
The Order options only exist to enable clerics and druids to do melee stuff if they want to build around that, and spellcasters are always going to take the extra cantrip and get the boost to Arcana, so it'll come up. As a matter of fact, my newest campaign features a druid with stellar Arcana, and the Wizard has already started passing Arcana checks to the druid because they don't plan on taking Expertise to get a smaller bonus than the druid already has.
Maybe other folks don't agree that it's an issue, but I'll probably do something to close this gap, because our Wizard came in excited to be the "knowledge" player, and is already feeling like they can't do that, mechanically. Doing the Arcana checks themselves (when they have to choose someone to try) feels like a waste of time because the Druid is so much better, and it would be silly (to my player) for them to keep insisting that they're good at it when they are numerically, factually, worse. For a class that's all about "study and get better," it's disappointing that they literally don't have a mechanic for that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Stories never end. They merely mark the beginning of the next chapter." -Rory Bristol "Failure means you've tried." -RB
I wouldn't houserule it. I don't think it's a big deal. Just because something can happen doesn't mean it will; or at least not often. If a Cleric or Druid is going to use ASIs on INT...I mean...they're mega nerfing their character, so be my guest. Same with a Cleric/Druid multiclass. It's not an issue. Wizards will almost always have the highest Arcana in the party. If some fringe cases are different it doesn't really matter.
For example, A Fey Wanderer Ranger can be better at Charisma checks than pretty much any other character. Is it a problem that the highest Performance possible is on a Ranger and not a Bard? No, of course not. If the Ranger wants to waste ASIs on Charisma, then let them have it.
So yeah, I don't think this will come up often, and in the rare cases it does, it really isn't a big deal. I wouldn't say "Wizards are worse at Arcana than Clerics and Druids", that's realistically not true.
^^ this. I don't think it's a huge issue. Wizards are so darned good at most things, it kind of is what it is.
If I did houserule it, I'd probably give the wizard expertise.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I mean, for the last 10 years, wizards have been better at nature than druids and better at religion than clerics. Maybe it’s time for payback. And realistically, clerics and druids will probably dump int. Or maybe put the 10 there.
I see what you mean ... tag on the Rogues 7th level feature and the minimum roll on an arcana check is 30, and 26 for nature and religion. Guidance where applicable too.
(12th level char to get the extra ASI and multiclass levels)
Okay, let's break this down. First of all, comparing a multiclass with a non-multiclass is misleading. It would be like saying "A wizard multiclassed with fighter would have better AC than a druid, which doesn't make sense because wizards are supposed to be squishier." Well, yeah, if only one is multiclassing, of course it's going to be different.
Saying that the orders are only there to let druids and clerics "do melee stuff if they want to build around that" is completely wrong. You might be focusing on the weapon proficiency, but ANY character benefits greatly from higher AC. A LOT of druids and clerics will go for the heavier armor simply because it's way too useful. "Spellcasters are always going to take the extra cantrip and get the boost to Arcana" is also very, very wrong. If you make a poll and ask which order they'd take as a cleric or druid, you'll be VERY surprised with the results. I'm not saying nobody will take the cantrip, don't get me wrong, but even if most don't take the armor (and I think most will), it'll still be a very high number, so saying "always" is far from the truth. I don't know if your campaigns allow casters to never get attacked if they simply stand back, but usually D&D doesn't work like that. That's why Shield is such a popular spell. Everyone can and WILL be attacked.
Intelligence is often not a dump stat for druids and clerics? Yes, it is. And now more than ever. If they can get their Wisdom to boost their Religion/Nature, then why waste so many points in Intelligence? At most make it 10 so it's not a -1 and call it a day.
Yes, the Fey Wanderer is a subclass, and you did take this subclass instead of another one. However, the Charisma boost is not why you chose it. They get a lot of useful stuff. But if you say they traded away other benefits for that, then a druid also traded benefits by investing 9 points in Intelligence as well as a better AC, never mind if they ALSO multiclass into cleric. Talk about trading away benefits.
But let's do the actual math. We won't count multiclassing because the wizard could also multiclass and it would be the same. Why compare a druid/cleric with a wizard when they could easily also be a wizard/cleric? So let's not take that into account. And even then, we're talking about a druid that decided to forego a much better AC AND 9 points of ability scores in Intelligence, which is not going to happen a lot, and is also nerfing themselves in other areas by doing this.
Level 1 will be awkward, yes. The druid has a +8 and the wizard has a +5. 3 points of difference.
Level 2 is much different. Now with Expertise, the wizard is at +7, so the difference is only 1 point. Still there, but hardly "I don't want to invest in Arcana because the druid is SO much better than me." Of course not.
Level 4 both get a +1, so the difference is the same.
Level 5 changes things, though. Now both are at +10.
At level 8 both get a +1, so it remains the same.
At level 9, however, the wizard suddenly is at +13, while the druid is at +12.
At level 12, let's assume the druid decided to use their ASI in Intelligence. Terrible choice and waste of a feat, but let's assume. Now both are at +13.
But immediately after that, one level later, at 13, the wizard is now at +15, while the druid is at +14. Wizard still on the lead.
At level 16, this druid AGAIN wastes another ASI on their Intelligence, so now both are at +15.
However, again, one level later, the wizard takes the lead again with a +17 compared to the druids +16. And it will stay the same from then on.
So it seems like only at low levels the druid is ahead of the wizard in terms of Arcana, and only a little (except for level 1). After that, the wizard catches up and then surpasses the druid. And I need to repeat this: this druid invested one third of their point buy AND 2 ASIs in a stat that does nothing for them except knowledge checks, not to mention foregoing medium armor, which will be at least a +2 AC difference, and that is IF they also invest 9 points in Dexterity (which would mean a -1 Constitution). Otherwise, the AC difference will be even greater. The wizard, on the other hand, didn't have to go out of their way at all! Only increased their main ability score, only used their first 2 ASI for it as well, and they probably chose WAY more useful stuff than the druid increasing their Intelligence so much for no reason.
More realistically, the druid will often pick the armor because it's super useful. And the ones who don't, will realize their Nature checks are finally good without needing to invest in Intelligence, so at most they'll raise it to 10 to avoid the -1 and let their Wisdom take it from there.
Now, what if the wizard doesn't multiclass but the druid does? Or what if the druid takes expertise in Arcana (instead of Nature, for some reason)? At that point you're drowning on a glass of water. This is something that will very, very rarely happen. So if it happens at your table, then you have the ONE player who decided to invest a ridiculous amount of resources in Arcana. You ask if other people would houserule this. I can guarantee almost nobody will because they won't need it. Your table might be a very rare case, so houserule away if you need to.
I mean, for the last 10 years, wizards have been better at nature than druids and better at religion than clerics. Maybe it’s time for payback. And realistically, clerics and druids will probably dump int. Or maybe put the 10 there.
You're not wrong. I was more bothered by the fact that clerics and druids were not great at the things supposedly in their wheelhouse than I am bothered by the fact that wizards are great at arcana, but clerics and druids are better. It's really not a problem at all. Wizards still do their thing really well.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Okay, let's break this down. First of all, comparing a multiclass with a non-multiclass is misleading. It would be like saying "A wizard multiclassed with fighter would have better AC than a druid, which doesn't make sense because wizards are supposed to be squishier." Well, yeah, if only one is multiclassing, of course it's going to be different.
Saying that the orders are only there to let druids and clerics "do melee stuff if they want to build around that" is completely wrong. You might be focusing on the weapon proficiency, but ANY character benefits greatly from higher AC. A LOT of druids and clerics will go for the heavier armor simply because it's way too useful. "Spellcasters are always going to take the extra cantrip and get the boost to Arcana" is also very, very wrong. If you make a poll and ask which order they'd take as a cleric or druid, you'll be VERY surprised with the results. I'm not saying nobody will take the cantrip, don't get me wrong, but even if most don't take the armor (and I think most will), it'll still be a very high number, so saying "always" is far from the truth. I don't know if your campaigns allow casters to never get attacked if they simply stand back, but usually D&D doesn't work like that. That's why Shield is such a popular spell. Everyone can and WILL be attacked.
Intelligence is often not a dump stat for druids and clerics? Yes, it is. And now more than ever. If they can get their Wisdom to boost their Religion/Nature, then why waste so many points in Intelligence? At most make it 10 so it's not a -1 and call it a day.
Yes, the Fey Wanderer is a subclass, and you did take this subclass instead of another one. However, the Charisma boost is not why you chose it. They get a lot of useful stuff. But if you say they traded away other benefits for that, then a druid also traded benefits by investing 9 points in Intelligence as well as a better AC, never mind if they ALSO multiclass into cleric. Talk about trading away benefits.
But let's do the actual math. We won't count multiclassing because the wizard could also multiclass and it would be the same. Why compare a druid/cleric with a wizard when they could easily also be a wizard/cleric? So let's not take that into account. And even then, we're talking about a druid that decided to forego a much better AC AND 9 points of ability scores in Intelligence, which is not going to happen a lot, and is also nerfing themselves in other areas by doing this.
Level 1 will be awkward, yes. The druid has a +8 and the wizard has a +5. 3 points of difference.
Level 2 is much different. Now with Expertise, the wizard is at +7, so the difference is only 1 point. Still there, but hardly "I don't want to invest in Arcana because the druid is SO much better than me." Of course not.
Level 4 both get a +1, so the difference is the same.
Level 5 changes things, though. Now both are at +10.
At level 8 both get a +1, so it remains the same.
At level 9, however, the wizard suddenly is at +13, while the druid is at +12.
At level 12, let's assume the druid decided to use their ASI in Intelligence. Terrible choice and waste of a feat, but let's assume. Now both are at +13.
But immediately after that, one level later, at 13, the wizard is now at +15, while the druid is at +14. Wizard still on the lead.
At level 16, this druid AGAIN wastes another ASI on their Intelligence, so now both are at +15.
However, again, one level later, the wizard takes the lead again with a +17 compared to the druids +16. And it will stay the same from then on.
So it seems like only at low levels the druid is ahead of the wizard in terms of Arcana, and only a little (except for level 1). After that, the wizard catches up and then surpasses the druid. And I need to repeat this: this druid invested one third of their point buy AND 2 ASIs in a stat that does nothing for them except knowledge checks, not to mention foregoing medium armor, which will be at least a +2 AC difference, and that is IF they also invest 9 points in Dexterity (which would mean a -1 Constitution). Otherwise, the AC difference will be even greater. The wizard, on the other hand, didn't have to go out of their way at all! Only increased their main ability score, only used their first 2 ASI for it as well, and they probably chose WAY more useful stuff than the druid increasing their Intelligence so much for no reason.
More realistically, the druid will often pick the armor because it's super useful. And the ones who don't, will realize their Nature checks are finally good without needing to invest in Intelligence, so at most they'll raise it to 10 to avoid the -1 and let their Wisdom take it from there.
Now, what if the wizard doesn't multiclass but the druid does? Or what if the druid takes expertise in Arcana (instead of Nature, for some reason)? At that point you're drowning on a glass of water. This is something that will very, very rarely happen. So if it happens at your table, then you have the ONE player who decided to invest a ridiculous amount of resources in Arcana. You ask if other people would houserule this. I can guarantee almost nobody will because they won't need it. Your table might be a very rare case, so houserule away if you need to.
This isn't wrong either. more often than not, I am taking armor and martial weapons if I think the character's going to move forward at all. I'd be more likely to take the magician option if there just isn't an int class in the party with the appreciable skills. At my tables wizards have been rare. Only one of our people has played wizard, and it's been only one character (not counting my current warlock|wizard with a 13 int...)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Thaumaturge. You know one extra cantrip from the Cleric spell list. In addition, your mystical connection to the divine gives you a bonus to your Intelligence (Arcana or Religion) checks. The bonus equals your Wisdom modifier (minimum of +1).
Giving heavy armor for that is likely to be less common than taking armor. Going for arcana instead of religion on a cleric is likely going to be less common than going for religion. This focus also requires an INT investment that's also unlikely. Sure, it's possible to be over-focused on arcana if that's what the player wants and if it is then let them.
Magician. You know one extra cantrip from the Druid spell list. In addition, your mystical connection to nature gives you a bonus to your Intelligence (Arcana or Nature) checks. The bonus equals your Wisdom modifier (minimum bonus of +1).
Similar arguments apply here. The armor is more likely, nature is more likely, and INT investment is unlikely. Let them if they choose to build that way. What was the point in giving those choices in the first place if they weren't meant to be allowed? ;-)
Scholar
While studying magic, you also specialized in another field of study. Choose one of the following skills in which you have proficiency: Arcana, History, Investigation, Medicine, Nature, or Religion. You have Expertise in the chosen skill.
These are all similar abilities. The cleric and druid are simply replacing expertise with their wisdom bonus instead. The wizard, however, has a broader list of choices and doesn't have to give anything up for that choice. If the party cleric or druid is trying to somehow show up the wizard in arcana I would just point out the wizard can reverse it by taking expertise in religion or nature.
All wizards get this bonus. Some clerics or druids might make this choice. I see no need to house rule against it.
I am genuinely baffled by the replies in this thread. To me it feels blindingly obvious that this is a "bug". Giving divine classes a bigger bonus on Arcana than the actual Arcane classes just feels... wrong, so I can only assume that a mistake was made.
I would always use a house rule where the Divine(Thaumaturge) and Primal(Magician) orders would replace Int with Wis for Arcana, not add it as an additional bonus, and I would even go so far as to say that these bonuses would not stack if a player chose to multiclass Cleric and Druid.
1 I don't think its that big of a deal as likely their int is only going to be 12 tops.
2. I'm not sure it stacks if you are a druid/cleric multiclass. Its the same benefit, and usually same things do not stack. But even if it does it will likely be worse than the wizards arcana expertise in most cases which wizards can get as a baked in feature..
3. Bards or even rogues could be better in 2014e due to expertise.
4. Thematically and I get this is a personal take on it but I don't see wizards as the one class explicitly dedicated to the Arcana skill more than either bards or warlocks. Mechanically in 2024 they will likely end up better, but warlocks and bards are study focused arcanists lore wise both of which magic stat should probably be int as well, but in the case of the bard I get why not as it would make them MAd with their implied skill set. I see wizards as the scientists of magic studying it like its chemist or math of it, Bards as the arcanists focused on the core of magic its origins, maybe like anthropologists, and warlocks are sort of the mad scientists of arcana, studying forbidden lore trying to find magic that is not meant for this world. So all just as arcana focused just in different themes.
I am genuinely baffled by the replies in this thread. To me it feels blindingly obvious that this is a "bug". Giving divine classes a bigger bonus on Arcana than the actual Arcane classes just feels... wrong, so I can only assume that a mistake was made.
I would always use a house rule where the Divine(Thaumaturge) and Primal(Magician) orders would replace Int with Wis for Arcana, not add it as an additional bonus, and I would even go so far as to say that these bonuses would not stack if a player chose to multiclass Cleric and Druid.
Outside a very unusual build they will be if the wizard chooses arcana at level 2 for their expertise.
I am genuinely baffled by the replies in this thread. To me it feels blindingly obvious that this is a "bug". Giving divine classes a bigger bonus on Arcana than the actual Arcane classes just feels... wrong, so I can only assume that a mistake was made.
I would always use a house rule where the Divine(Thaumaturge) and Primal(Magician) orders would replace Int with Wis for Arcana, not add it as an additional bonus, and I would even go so far as to say that these bonuses would not stack if a player chose to multiclass Cleric and Druid.
That's not something giving to clerics or druids. It's an outside-the-box choice offered to those classes who are required to invest into instead of religion or nature. Are you also baffled that wizards can be better at religion than a cleric or nature than a druid and often are because of the INT focus of the class?
Are you also baffled that wizards can be better at religion than a cleric or nature than a druid and often are because of the INT focus of the class?
I'm gonna steal Withers No for this one. Same thing irl.
Also mechanically INT is the weakest STAT, making it more dumpy doesnt help, replacing it can makes sens with certain thematic tho it is a bit unfair, adding it makes no sens and is definitely more than unfair. Outside-the box choice are great as long as its fair mechanically.
The point of a stat system is to say : you can not be good at everything, choose.
I am genuinely baffled by the replies in this thread. To me it feels blindingly obvious that this is a "bug". Giving divine classes a bigger bonus on Arcana than the actual Arcane classes just feels... wrong, so I can only assume that a mistake was made.
I would always use a house rule where the Divine(Thaumaturge) and Primal(Magician) orders would replace Int with Wis for Arcana, not add it as an additional bonus, and I would even go so far as to say that these bonuses would not stack if a player chose to multiclass Cleric and Druid.
That's not something giving to clerics or druids. It's an outside-the-box choice offered to those classes who are required to invest into instead of religion or nature. Are you also baffled that wizards can be better at religion than a cleric or nature than a druid and often are because of the INT focus of the class?
This! A wizard will pretty much always be better at Religion and Nature than clerics and druids, and that is IF they choose the Thaumaturge or Magician. Sounds like they're perfectly fine if a Protector cleric or a Warden druid are worse at Religion and Nature than a wizard. Even if the wizard isn't proficient they'll still be better most of the time.
Are you also baffled that wizards can be better at religion than a cleric or nature than a druid and often are because of the INT focus of the class?
I'm gonna steal Withers No for this one. Same thing irl.
Also mechanically INT is the weakest STAT, making it more dumpy doesnt help, replacing it can makes sens with certain thematic tho it is a bit unfair, adding it makes no sens and is definitely more than unfair. Outside-the box choice are great as long as its fair mechanically.
The point of a stat system is to say : you can not be good at everything, choose.
I agree about the unfortunate state of the int stat. While I overall did not like 4e, I felt they ran from it too much as there were good things in it. Giving Int some mechanical oomph beyond an excuse to metagame knowledge of monsters was one of them. I can't remember the exact breakdown but they had some either or stats for defenses or initiative etc, so like int i think could work in place of a good dex for some things for example. That being said I think in this specific case its not a big deal as the wizard will almost certainly be better at Arcana, and may just be edged out a bit by nature or religion.
(also 4es ritual system should have been used with some adjustments mainly making rituals more a single person thing so you didn't need party buy in for your character being a ritualist, but the idea big ticket world shaping spells were off spell lists and made into rituals any class could learn was awesome like teleport for example. Leave spell casting for combat or other needs to get done in a action oriented spells, the rest can be rituals)
Wizards aren't worse in Arcana checks nore in Casting spells, the only thing t they are worse is in Mastering the Spell recovery. Why noone noted this ??? Wizards can recover a number of spells after taking a short rest ) at lvl 1 ) but, then in later levels, they don't get a Master in recovering spells or, at least, quickening the recovery a bit faster.
Then, if at level 17 a wizard could recover a certain number of spells, instead of taking a short rest, just taking 10 turns i.e. doing a pause, then it could be fast enough continuing being useful in the journey.
I highly doubt the cleric/druid multiclass would be allowed to stack int and wis mods twice. No way that is intended and I'm not even sure it's RAW. Both features just say you can add it. I would think it's similar to other things that give the same bonus, you only get one.
I was excited to see that wizards could get expertise in Arcana and a little disappointed other classes could also excel at the skill, but honestly let people play the way they want. If someone wants to play a druid who is good at Arcana, they can do it now. That's good for the game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
InsiderIf you want to be the best character in your party for Arcana checks, you probably don't want to be a Wizard with RAW.
With the new Divine Order and Primal Order options, both Clerics and Druids can add both their WIS and INT to Arcana checks, even if they aren't trained in it. What's weirder is that these features stack, which means that a Level 2 Wizard might have Expertise in Arcana and have a max of +7 to Arcana, where a Cleric 1/Druid 1 can realistically have +6 from WIS bonuses, +2 from Proficiency, and +~2 for INT if it isn't a dump stat. So they could have +10 at level 2, or either class can easily get +7 without multiclassing. It just seems supremely odd that the one class explicitly dedicated to the Arcana skill has to take proficiency and expertise to get the same strength a level 1 Druid or Cleric has, and has no way without multiclassing to eclipse them. Hell, the Druid or Cleric could use ASIs to increase both WIS and INT over time, meaning they could get up to +11 without multiclassing or +16 with multiclassing, increasing further if expertise is taken.
To further dump on Wizards, both Clerics and Druids also get this boost to their own iconic stat (Religion and Nature, respectively), so they aren't even trading anything for being the most accomplished scholar in Arcana.
My question: Would you introduce a houserule to increase wizards' scaling for Arcana? Especially since they get no new class features from level 5 to level 18, it seems like an appropriate feature to grant around level 10-12, when lots of other classes get big boosts to damage or utility. Or do you think this would this be overkill?
"Stories never end. They merely mark the beginning of the next chapter." -Rory Bristol
"Failure means you've tried." -RB
I wouldn't houserule it. I don't think it's a big deal. Just because something can happen doesn't mean it will; or at least not often. If a Cleric or Druid is going to use ASIs on INT...I mean...they're mega nerfing their character, so be my guest. Same with a Cleric/Druid multiclass. It's not an issue. Wizards will almost always have the highest Arcana in the party. If some fringe cases are different it doesn't really matter.
For example, A Fey Wanderer Ranger can be better at Charisma checks than pretty much any other character. Is it a problem that the highest Performance possible is on a Ranger and not a Bard? No, of course not. If the Ranger wants to waste ASIs on Charisma, then let them have it.
So yeah, I don't think this will come up often, and in the rare cases it does, it really isn't a big deal. I wouldn't say "Wizards are worse at Arcana than Clerics and Druids", that's realistically not true.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
InsiderI think I would agree with you if Druids used their Wisdom instead of Int. As it stands, you don't even need ASIs to have a better Arcana than a Wizard, because Int is often not a dump stat anyway, because Nature relies on it, I wouldn't say that Fey Wanderer is a good analogy either, because that's a subclass that is trading away other benefits to get that perk, and they have a number of useful other choices.The fact that Wizards can't make any meaningful choice to get the same boost to their most iconic skill is... just sad.
The Order options only exist to enable clerics and druids to do melee stuff if they want to build around that, and spellcasters are always going to take the extra cantrip and get the boost to Arcana, so it'll come up. As a matter of fact, my newest campaign features a druid with stellar Arcana, and the Wizard has already started passing Arcana checks to the druid because they don't plan on taking Expertise to get a smaller bonus than the druid already has.
Maybe other folks don't agree that it's an issue, but I'll probably do something to close this gap, because our Wizard came in excited to be the "knowledge" player, and is already feeling like they can't do that, mechanically. Doing the Arcana checks themselves (when they have to choose someone to try) feels like a waste of time because the Druid is so much better, and it would be silly (to my player) for them to keep insisting that they're good at it when they are numerically, factually, worse. For a class that's all about "study and get better," it's disappointing that they literally don't have a mechanic for that.
"Stories never end. They merely mark the beginning of the next chapter." -Rory Bristol
"Failure means you've tried." -RB
^^ this. I don't think it's a huge issue. Wizards are so darned good at most things, it kind of is what it is.
If I did houserule it, I'd probably give the wizard expertise.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
I mean, for the last 10 years, wizards have been better at nature than druids and better at religion than clerics. Maybe it’s time for payback.
And realistically, clerics and druids will probably dump int. Or maybe put the 10 there.
I see what you mean ... tag on the Rogues 7th level feature and the minimum roll on an arcana check is 30, and 26 for nature and religion. Guidance where applicable too.
(12th level char to get the extra ASI and multiclass levels)
Loremaster's Character Sheet - D&D Beyond (dndbeyond.com)
Not too flash in combat mind. ;o)
Life's hard - get a helmet!
Okay, let's break this down. First of all, comparing a multiclass with a non-multiclass is misleading. It would be like saying "A wizard multiclassed with fighter would have better AC than a druid, which doesn't make sense because wizards are supposed to be squishier." Well, yeah, if only one is multiclassing, of course it's going to be different.
Saying that the orders are only there to let druids and clerics "do melee stuff if they want to build around that" is completely wrong. You might be focusing on the weapon proficiency, but ANY character benefits greatly from higher AC. A LOT of druids and clerics will go for the heavier armor simply because it's way too useful. "Spellcasters are always going to take the extra cantrip and get the boost to Arcana" is also very, very wrong. If you make a poll and ask which order they'd take as a cleric or druid, you'll be VERY surprised with the results. I'm not saying nobody will take the cantrip, don't get me wrong, but even if most don't take the armor (and I think most will), it'll still be a very high number, so saying "always" is far from the truth. I don't know if your campaigns allow casters to never get attacked if they simply stand back, but usually D&D doesn't work like that. That's why Shield is such a popular spell. Everyone can and WILL be attacked.
Intelligence is often not a dump stat for druids and clerics? Yes, it is. And now more than ever. If they can get their Wisdom to boost their Religion/Nature, then why waste so many points in Intelligence? At most make it 10 so it's not a -1 and call it a day.
Yes, the Fey Wanderer is a subclass, and you did take this subclass instead of another one. However, the Charisma boost is not why you chose it. They get a lot of useful stuff. But if you say they traded away other benefits for that, then a druid also traded benefits by investing 9 points in Intelligence as well as a better AC, never mind if they ALSO multiclass into cleric. Talk about trading away benefits.
But let's do the actual math. We won't count multiclassing because the wizard could also multiclass and it would be the same. Why compare a druid/cleric with a wizard when they could easily also be a wizard/cleric? So let's not take that into account. And even then, we're talking about a druid that decided to forego a much better AC AND 9 points of ability scores in Intelligence, which is not going to happen a lot, and is also nerfing themselves in other areas by doing this.
Level 1 will be awkward, yes. The druid has a +8 and the wizard has a +5. 3 points of difference.
Level 2 is much different. Now with Expertise, the wizard is at +7, so the difference is only 1 point. Still there, but hardly "I don't want to invest in Arcana because the druid is SO much better than me." Of course not.
Level 4 both get a +1, so the difference is the same.
Level 5 changes things, though. Now both are at +10.
At level 8 both get a +1, so it remains the same.
At level 9, however, the wizard suddenly is at +13, while the druid is at +12.
At level 12, let's assume the druid decided to use their ASI in Intelligence. Terrible choice and waste of a feat, but let's assume. Now both are at +13.
But immediately after that, one level later, at 13, the wizard is now at +15, while the druid is at +14. Wizard still on the lead.
At level 16, this druid AGAIN wastes another ASI on their Intelligence, so now both are at +15.
However, again, one level later, the wizard takes the lead again with a +17 compared to the druids +16. And it will stay the same from then on.
So it seems like only at low levels the druid is ahead of the wizard in terms of Arcana, and only a little (except for level 1). After that, the wizard catches up and then surpasses the druid. And I need to repeat this: this druid invested one third of their point buy AND 2 ASIs in a stat that does nothing for them except knowledge checks, not to mention foregoing medium armor, which will be at least a +2 AC difference, and that is IF they also invest 9 points in Dexterity (which would mean a -1 Constitution). Otherwise, the AC difference will be even greater.
The wizard, on the other hand, didn't have to go out of their way at all! Only increased their main ability score, only used their first 2 ASI for it as well, and they probably chose WAY more useful stuff than the druid increasing their Intelligence so much for no reason.
More realistically, the druid will often pick the armor because it's super useful. And the ones who don't, will realize their Nature checks are finally good without needing to invest in Intelligence, so at most they'll raise it to 10 to avoid the -1 and let their Wisdom take it from there.
Now, what if the wizard doesn't multiclass but the druid does? Or what if the druid takes expertise in Arcana (instead of Nature, for some reason)? At that point you're drowning on a glass of water. This is something that will very, very rarely happen. So if it happens at your table, then you have the ONE player who decided to invest a ridiculous amount of resources in Arcana. You ask if other people would houserule this. I can guarantee almost nobody will because they won't need it. Your table might be a very rare case, so houserule away if you need to.
You're not wrong. I was more bothered by the fact that clerics and druids were not great at the things supposedly in their wheelhouse than I am bothered by the fact that wizards are great at arcana, but clerics and druids are better. It's really not a problem at all. Wizards still do their thing really well.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
This isn't wrong either. more often than not, I am taking armor and martial weapons if I think the character's going to move forward at all. I'd be more likely to take the magician option if there just isn't an int class in the party with the appreciable skills. At my tables wizards have been rare. Only one of our people has played wizard, and it's been only one character (not counting my current warlock|wizard with a 13 int...)
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Here...
Giving heavy armor for that is likely to be less common than taking armor. Going for arcana instead of religion on a cleric is likely going to be less common than going for religion. This focus also requires an INT investment that's also unlikely. Sure, it's possible to be over-focused on arcana if that's what the player wants and if it is then let them.
Similar arguments apply here. The armor is more likely, nature is more likely, and INT investment is unlikely. Let them if they choose to build that way. What was the point in giving those choices in the first place if they weren't meant to be allowed? ;-)
These are all similar abilities. The cleric and druid are simply replacing expertise with their wisdom bonus instead. The wizard, however, has a broader list of choices and doesn't have to give anything up for that choice. If the party cleric or druid is trying to somehow show up the wizard in arcana I would just point out the wizard can reverse it by taking expertise in religion or nature.
All wizards get this bonus. Some clerics or druids might make this choice. I see no need to house rule against it.
Btw you can actually select other profiency (than those listed) on that scholar expertise on dndbeyond, is this for me only ?
I am genuinely baffled by the replies in this thread. To me it feels blindingly obvious that this is a "bug". Giving divine classes a bigger bonus on Arcana than the actual Arcane classes just feels... wrong, so I can only assume that a mistake was made.
I would always use a house rule where the Divine(Thaumaturge) and Primal(Magician) orders would replace Int with Wis for Arcana, not add it as an additional bonus, and I would even go so far as to say that these bonuses would not stack if a player chose to multiclass Cleric and Druid.
1 I don't think its that big of a deal as likely their int is only going to be 12 tops.
2. I'm not sure it stacks if you are a druid/cleric multiclass. Its the same benefit, and usually same things do not stack. But even if it does it will likely be worse than the wizards arcana expertise in most cases which wizards can get as a baked in feature..
3. Bards or even rogues could be better in 2014e due to expertise.
4. Thematically and I get this is a personal take on it but I don't see wizards as the one class explicitly dedicated to the Arcana skill more than either bards or warlocks. Mechanically in 2024 they will likely end up better, but warlocks and bards are study focused arcanists lore wise both of which magic stat should probably be int as well, but in the case of the bard I get why not as it would make them MAd with their implied skill set. I see wizards as the scientists of magic studying it like its chemist or math of it, Bards as the arcanists focused on the core of magic its origins, maybe like anthropologists, and warlocks are sort of the mad scientists of arcana, studying forbidden lore trying to find magic that is not meant for this world. So all just as arcana focused just in different themes.
Outside a very unusual build they will be if the wizard chooses arcana at level 2 for their expertise.
That's not something giving to clerics or druids. It's an outside-the-box choice offered to those classes who are required to invest into instead of religion or nature. Are you also baffled that wizards can be better at religion than a cleric or nature than a druid and often are because of the INT focus of the class?
I'm gonna steal Withers No for this one. Same thing irl.
Also mechanically INT is the weakest STAT, making it more dumpy doesnt help, replacing it can makes sens with certain thematic tho it is a bit unfair, adding it makes no sens and is definitely more than unfair.
Outside-the box choice are great as long as its fair mechanically.
The point of a stat system is to say : you can not be good at everything, choose.
This! A wizard will pretty much always be better at Religion and Nature than clerics and druids, and that is IF they choose the Thaumaturge or Magician. Sounds like they're perfectly fine if a Protector cleric or a Warden druid are worse at Religion and Nature than a wizard. Even if the wizard isn't proficient they'll still be better most of the time.
I agree about the unfortunate state of the int stat. While I overall did not like 4e, I felt they ran from it too much as there were good things in it. Giving Int some mechanical oomph beyond an excuse to metagame knowledge of monsters was one of them. I can't remember the exact breakdown but they had some either or stats for defenses or initiative etc, so like int i think could work in place of a good dex for some things for example. That being said I think in this specific case its not a big deal as the wizard will almost certainly be better at Arcana, and may just be edged out a bit by nature or religion.
(also 4es ritual system should have been used with some adjustments mainly making rituals more a single person thing so you didn't need party buy in for your character being a ritualist, but the idea big ticket world shaping spells were off spell lists and made into rituals any class could learn was awesome like teleport for example. Leave spell casting for combat or other needs to get done in a action oriented spells, the rest can be rituals)
Wizards aren't worse in Arcana checks nore in Casting spells, the only thing t they are worse is in Mastering the Spell recovery. Why noone noted this ??? Wizards can recover a number of spells after taking a short rest ) at lvl 1 ) but, then in later levels, they don't get a Master in recovering spells or, at least, quickening the recovery a bit faster.
Then, if at level 17 a wizard could recover a certain number of spells, instead of taking a short rest, just taking 10 turns i.e. doing a pause, then it could be fast enough continuing being useful in the journey.
Why being a wizz is so complicated ???
My Ready-to-rock&roll chars:
Dertinus Tristany // Amilcar Barca // Vicenç Sacrarius // Oriol Deulofeu // Grovtuk
I highly doubt the cleric/druid multiclass would be allowed to stack int and wis mods twice. No way that is intended and I'm not even sure it's RAW. Both features just say you can add it. I would think it's similar to other things that give the same bonus, you only get one.
I was excited to see that wizards could get expertise in Arcana and a little disappointed other classes could also excel at the skill, but honestly let people play the way they want. If someone wants to play a druid who is good at Arcana, they can do it now. That's good for the game.