Disintegrate does have the ability to defeat Wall of Force (the spell explicitly indicates this), but it's not clear whether or not you need to have a See Invisibility type buff up in order to use it that way. Disintegrate requires you to see your target (once again, vision plays a big role for so many spells), and Wall of Force and Forcecage are both invisible, so you can't see them without having a buff like See Invisibility or True Seeing up. But this would just mean that escaping a Forcecage would require a level 2 spell and a level 6 spell instead of just a level 6 spell.
The point of these PVP is obviously both maximum power pre buff. and if you want to include buffs, the Wizard would over the years, every day over years creating simulacrum and clones and store them in demi-plane.
Notes: Please keep comments constructive and respectful.
Using the simulacrum tactic (cast simulacrum on yourself, your simulacrum casts wish on you to make another simulacrum of you, repeat) the wizard would easily win.
I'd have to say that the wizard would win. They have way more versatility, way more spell slots, and they're just better. The wizard also has access to spells that would be incredibly useful. Invulnerability is a great one, even if it means you can't use power word kill later on. I would go with an abjuration wizard for the extra HP or a chronurgy wizard for the initiative buff so you could get invulnerability off before the warlock goes. The warlock has its merits, but it just can't hold up to a 1v1 with a wizard. The wizard has enough spell slots to counterspell all of the warlock's spells.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew and give me feedback!
The point of these PVP is obviously both maximum power pre buff. and if you want to include buffs, the Wizard would over the years, every day over years creating simulacrum and clones and store them in demi-plane.
I know. Sorry, but I'm not going to let someone tell him tell me that my opinion is somehow less than his. He's making strawman arguments, and I'm just trying to point out the fault in his posts.
What Straw Man arguments am I doing? That limiting combat to only taking place with dim light or bright light and excluding darkness was unreasonable? I said that after I was told that just giving both players cover at the start of the battle was unreasonable. Devil's Sight is one of the key Warlock abilities, and you're trying to make it irrelevant.
That giving players 8 hours to rest up before combat when the Warlock needs 1 minute is unfair? One of the main Warlock strengths is getting all of their spell slots back on a short rest, and their cap stone ability at level 20 is getting your spell slots back in just 1 minute, and you're trying to make it irrelevant.
But if we don't let the Wizard have all three of his portents, now that's just downright unfair though. Because we can't take away a player's key abilities .... unless we're doing that to the Warlock.
I'd have to say that the wizard would win. They have way more versatility, way more spell slots, and they're just better. The wizard also has access to spells that would be incredibly useful. Invulnerability is a great one, even if it means you can't use power word kill later on. I would go with an abjuration wizard for the extra HP or a chronurgy wizard for the initiative buff so you could get invulnerability off before the warlock goes. The warlock has its merits, but it just can't hold up to a 1v1 with a wizard. The wizard has enough spell slots to counterspell all of the warlock's spells.
Don't forget that Abjuration Wizards get advantage on saving throws against magic, and they get resistance to damage from magic. I agree that the Wizard would win, and I also would choose Abjuration.
The Wizard has enough spell slots to counterspell all of the Warlock's spells, which is why the Warlock needs to stay more than 60ft away from the Wizard or out of sight. Thankfully, Warlocks were designed to do this because they were given the Devil's Sight invocation to give them 120ft vision in the dark, and they're a class that thematically lose the dark. However, there are some trolls on here that don't think it's fair to give the Warlock the opportunity to take advantage of his abilities in a gaming environment to their liking. Apparently fighting in DARKNESS in DUNGEONS and dragons is too unfair. [REDACTED]
Notes: Please keep posts constructive and respectful.
The point of these PVP is obviously both maximum power pre buff. and if you want to include buffs, the Wizard would over the years, every day over years creating simulacrum and clones and store them in demi-plane.
What Straw Man arguments am I doing? That limiting combat to only taking place with dim light or bright light and excluding darkness was unreasonable? I said that after I was told that just giving both players cover at the start of the battle was unreasonable. Devil's Sight is one of the key Warlock abilities, and you're trying to make it irrelevant.
A strawman argument is where you intentionally misrepresent my arguments because you don't actually want to refute them. That is the literal definition of what you're doing. Your response saying that I was trying to limit what could be said on the thread because I thought I was the DM of the thread is a strawman argument. You didn't want to actually respond to my rebuttals against your arguments, so you chose an easier option, to ignore them an attack me.
Devil's sight is not a key warlock ability. It is an invocation that in the battle they can still take advantage of if they cast Darkness. That is completely a different circumstance from literally taking away the Wizard's hit points and spell slots. I'm not trying to make it irrelevant, it is clearly more fair to have the arena brightly lit than dark.
That giving players 8 hours to rest up before combat when the Warlock needs 1 minute is unfair? One of the main Warlock strengths is getting all of their spell slots back on a short rest, and their cap stone ability at level 20 is getting your spell slots back in just 1 minute, and you're trying to make it irrelevant.
You are ignoring my point! The fairest way to do the battle is to ignore everything that happens before hand. The Warlock makes no choice to take the long rest, neither does the Wizard! They could literally start existing when the battle starts to get rid of the complexity of a previous life. I'm not trying to make their abilities irrelevant, because those abilities are clearly not combat-effective. It is normally unreasonable to take 1 minute of a battle doing anything, much less recover spell slots. Sure, the Warlock could try that in a forcecage or hidden somehow, but those abilities weren't designed to work in combat! This is a combat battle where we analyze which class is more effective IN COMBAT! We're not analyzing which class is the best at recovering spell slots! I'm not trying to make those abilities irrelevant, because of this key point:
THEY ARE ALREADY IRRELEVANT INSIDE COMBAT!
(I'm not angry or yelling or anything, I'm just highlighting the most important point in this response to this one statement.)
But if we don't let the Wizard have all three of his portents, now that's just downright unfair though. Because we can't take away a player's key abilities .... unless we're doing that to the Warlock.
Of course it's unfair to literally strip the Wizard subclass of its key ability! That is effective in combat! That's the Diviner's main ability! That's why literally anyone plays the Diviner! We're not taking away abilities from the Warlock, we're only talking about the abilities that are even relevant in this kind of battle.
The Wizard has enough spell slots to counterspell all of the Warlock's spells, which is why the Warlock needs to stay more than 60ft away from the Wizard or out of sight. Thankfully, Warlocks were designed to do this because they were given the Devil's Sight invocation to give them 120ft vision in the dark, and they're a class that thematically lose the dark. However, there are some trolls on here that don't think it's fair to give the Warlock the opportunity to take advantage of his abilities in a gaming environment to their liking. Apparently fighting in DARKNESS in DUNGEONS and dragons is too unfair. I'm being gaslighted by some jerks on here that are trying to convince me that it's unreasonable to not stack the deck in favor of the Wizard.
(emphasis mine)
Warlocks aren't given specific invocations. They choose them.
Do you know literally anything about the scientific method? You don't change the setting of the experiment when you start changing certain parts of it, you keep it the same in order to get accurate results. If you change the field of battle after the first battle based on the choices the players make in designing their second character, you've broken the experiment and no longer receive accurate results. I am advocating for a scientific process at finding if the Wizard or Warlock is more effective in combat to get real results.
Also, this battle would not be DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS as a game, it would be a test. Day still exists in D&D, light still exists. They're not in a dungeon, they're in an arena to test the power of the classes in combat. You're 100% not understanding the purpose of this experiment. It's meant to be an EXPERIMENT.
(Also, gaslighting is a really weird term to be used by you in this situation. How are we playing mind games to drive you insane by defending our positions?)
We're not trying to stack the battle in favor for the Wizard, we're trying to scientifically find which class is more effective in combat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I'd have to say that the wizard would win. They have way more versatility, way more spell slots, and they're just better. The wizard also has access to spells that would be incredibly useful. Invulnerability is a great one, even if it means you can't use power word kill later on. I would go with an abjuration wizard for the extra HP or a chronurgy wizard for the initiative buff so you could get invulnerability off before the warlock goes. The warlock has its merits, but it just can't hold up to a 1v1 with a wizard. The wizard has enough spell slots to counterspell all of the warlock's spells.
I agree. The Wizard is more likely to win, which I believe we would see if we had a way of simulating this. The Wizard has enough spell slots to counterspell some of the Warlock's eldritch blasts.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Night still exists in D&D, Darkness still exists in D&D, Dungeons still exist in D&D. These things exist along side Daylight and above ground areas. BOTH AREAS EXIST.
I haven't been saying that the battle should only take place in the dark. I've been saying that we should consider multiple different situations (although I've never suggested starting them off at less than maximum health, that was your idea). I've been told that we can't consider multiple different battlefield environments, and that the discussion needs to be limited to just one battlefield environment, one that we will tailor to the Wizard's desires.
[REDACTED]
Notes: Please keep comments constructive and respectful.
[REDACTED] The fact of the matter is that this should be as close to a scientific experiment as we can get it. The scientific method has been used for hundreds of years, and is a way to guarantee accurate results in nearly any circumstance. If we want to accurately measure which class is more effective in combat, it's best to emulate this process as much as possible. We only need one arena, because that's how you can guarantee correct results.
[REDACTED]
Notes: Please keep posts on-topic and constructive.
All subsequent posts to this thread are to be kept on-topic and constructive in nature. Personal debate can be taken to Private Messages, as these posts do not need to be vented publicly.
Please sent me a Private Message with any questions or for further clarification.
In an arena style of fighting, i think the wizard takes it, due to prep time, but without time to prep, warlock takes it i think.
Even without preparation, the Abjuration Wizard's improved ability at both Dispel Magic and Counterspell is going to be a huge bonus. The extra 45hp in the Arcane Ward is also a huge bonus. But most of all, his advantage on saving throws against spells and his resistance to damage from spells are unlimited use always on abilities that will always be useful when facing a spellcaster. This might be enough to push it in the Abjuration Wizard's favor even when he's not prepared.
If you're using your first turn on Counterspell to get rid of a buff from the Warlock, then that means the Warlock automatically gets 1 turn before you do something other than Counterspell, and possibly 2 turns before you actually get to do something other than Counterspell.
I don't understand why the Warlock would have extra turns. Isn't counter spell a reaction spell?
Also every PvP that I've heard of either doesn't include magic items or at least the opponent needs equally powerful magic items. Unless you are already accepting one is weaker and needs a handicap.
Every thing I have seen in this thread for warlocks winning. Is a scenario where the wizard does not have equal preparation as the warlock.
the warlock is specifically tailored to fight the wizard. But the wizard is not specifically tailored in the same vein to fight the warlock. I honestly just stopped responding to the homeristic takes at this point.
the headband of intellect comment especially. Doesn’t change. A single thing regarding a portent to make a guy fail other than decreasing the range of effective fail. Or the spell effects of feeblemind.
The big thing he’s missing about feeblemind with his headband of intellect. Is it specifically says you cannot cast spells, or activate magic items. Even if one wants to waste time arguing about magic items already activated. Congrats. You have a 19 int warlock with 1 charisma that cannot cast spells. Good luck.
Honestly, and I am asking as I don’t see how this keeps getting argued.
but the “darkness” scenario.
so... the wizard, is just going to be chilling, in darkness. Not seeing anything. While the warlock. Customized to see in darkness, doesn’t even have to set up the darkness himself. And this is considered a “fair” setting?
heres the reality of that:
wizard: “it’s dark” teleport.
wizard: “it’s dark.” Daylight.
wizard: “it’s dark.” I must be under attack. Invulnerability.
wizard: “it’s dark” I wish anything in this darkness with me that can see in the dark dies.
infinite scenarios of why the wizard isn’t just going to stand in the darkness, picking his nose, until a warlock attacks him.
the difference in spell power is just too drastic for the warlock. And the warlock just doesn’t have an effective way to bring the wizard down fast enough.
this is done by WoTC by design. This is the trade off for wizards and sorcerers being so squishy and easy to kill at lower levels. Is that end levels they are harder to kill. Balance.
i saw mention of things like alert feat for winning initiative, and I thought... why? Why not spell sniper to double casting ranges?
theres tons of variables and such. There’s tons of scenarios.
to Gabe’s point: “yes”. If we really bend over backwards and do a lot of favorable things for warlock and give the wizard handicaps the warlock can win.
but that’s not what the question was designed to ask. It was designed for a “full power vs full power. Straight up scenario. Who wins?”
Got it. We're playing dungeons and dragons in a world with no darkness and no magic items. To have darkness or magic items available to level 20 characters is bending over backwards. Heck, even just starting off the two characters both behind cover is bending over backwards.
I've never said that I thought Warlock was better or more powerful. I've always said that I thought Abjuration Wizard is the best choice. But I'm shocked by the degree that people want to bend over backwards to cater to the Wizard's wishes. The Wizard is the more powerful option, he doesn't need you stacking the deck in his favor. Even in conditions set to favor the Warlock, the Wizard still probably wins.
It's funny, the question is apparently "full power vs full power, straight up scenario", but no magic items permitted. The Warlock can't give his Sprite a Ring of Spell Storing with Greater Restoration cast into it. Because that's too powerful. We want full power, except when we don't want full power.
I'll rephrase the question: Wizard 20 vs Warlock 20, where the Wizard gets to set the rules, who wins? We don't need a huge thread to answer this question. Wizard wins.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It's clear that the RAI is that you don't have to be able to see creations of magical force to disintegrate them.
Even if it does take 2 actions, the wizard is either inside the box and invulnerable to spell effects or able to cast through the cage.
[REDACTED]
The point of these PVP is obviously both maximum power pre buff. and if you want to include buffs, the Wizard would over the years, every day over years creating simulacrum and clones and store them in demi-plane.
Using the simulacrum tactic (cast simulacrum on yourself, your simulacrum casts wish on you to make another simulacrum of you, repeat) the wizard would easily win.
There is no dawn after eternal night.
Homebrew: Magic items, Subclasses
No, I wouldn't limit the races.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I'd have to say that the wizard would win. They have way more versatility, way more spell slots, and they're just better. The wizard also has access to spells that would be incredibly useful. Invulnerability is a great one, even if it means you can't use power word kill later on. I would go with an abjuration wizard for the extra HP or a chronurgy wizard for the initiative buff so you could get invulnerability off before the warlock goes. The warlock has its merits, but it just can't hold up to a 1v1 with a wizard. The wizard has enough spell slots to counterspell all of the warlock's spells.
Please check out my homebrew and give me feedback!
Subclasses | Races | Spells | Magic Items | Monsters | Feats | Backgrounds
What Straw Man arguments am I doing? That limiting combat to only taking place with dim light or bright light and excluding darkness was unreasonable? I said that after I was told that just giving both players cover at the start of the battle was unreasonable. Devil's Sight is one of the key Warlock abilities, and you're trying to make it irrelevant.
That giving players 8 hours to rest up before combat when the Warlock needs 1 minute is unfair? One of the main Warlock strengths is getting all of their spell slots back on a short rest, and their cap stone ability at level 20 is getting your spell slots back in just 1 minute, and you're trying to make it irrelevant.
But if we don't let the Wizard have all three of his portents, now that's just downright unfair though. Because we can't take away a player's key abilities .... unless we're doing that to the Warlock.
Don't forget that Abjuration Wizards get advantage on saving throws against magic, and they get resistance to damage from magic. I agree that the Wizard would win, and I also would choose Abjuration.
The Wizard has enough spell slots to counterspell all of the Warlock's spells, which is why the Warlock needs to stay more than 60ft away from the Wizard or out of sight. Thankfully, Warlocks were designed to do this because they were given the Devil's Sight invocation to give them 120ft vision in the dark, and they're a class that thematically lose the dark. However, there are some trolls on here that don't think it's fair to give the Warlock the opportunity to take advantage of his abilities in a gaming environment to their liking. Apparently fighting in DARKNESS in DUNGEONS and dragons is too unfair. [REDACTED]
A strawman argument is where you intentionally misrepresent my arguments because you don't actually want to refute them. That is the literal definition of what you're doing. Your response saying that I was trying to limit what could be said on the thread because I thought I was the DM of the thread is a strawman argument. You didn't want to actually respond to my rebuttals against your arguments, so you chose an easier option, to ignore them an attack me.
Devil's sight is not a key warlock ability. It is an invocation that in the battle they can still take advantage of if they cast Darkness. That is completely a different circumstance from literally taking away the Wizard's hit points and spell slots. I'm not trying to make it irrelevant, it is clearly more fair to have the arena brightly lit than dark.
You are ignoring my point! The fairest way to do the battle is to ignore everything that happens before hand. The Warlock makes no choice to take the long rest, neither does the Wizard! They could literally start existing when the battle starts to get rid of the complexity of a previous life. I'm not trying to make their abilities irrelevant, because those abilities are clearly not combat-effective. It is normally unreasonable to take 1 minute of a battle doing anything, much less recover spell slots. Sure, the Warlock could try that in a forcecage or hidden somehow, but those abilities weren't designed to work in combat! This is a combat battle where we analyze which class is more effective IN COMBAT! We're not analyzing which class is the best at recovering spell slots! I'm not trying to make those abilities irrelevant, because of this key point:
THEY ARE ALREADY IRRELEVANT INSIDE COMBAT!
(I'm not angry or yelling or anything, I'm just highlighting the most important point in this response to this one statement.)
Of course it's unfair to literally strip the Wizard subclass of its key ability! That is effective in combat! That's the Diviner's main ability! That's why literally anyone plays the Diviner! We're not taking away abilities from the Warlock, we're only talking about the abilities that are even relevant in this kind of battle.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
(emphasis mine)
Warlocks aren't given specific invocations. They choose them.
Do you know literally anything about the scientific method? You don't change the setting of the experiment when you start changing certain parts of it, you keep it the same in order to get accurate results. If you change the field of battle after the first battle based on the choices the players make in designing their second character, you've broken the experiment and no longer receive accurate results. I am advocating for a scientific process at finding if the Wizard or Warlock is more effective in combat to get real results.
Also, this battle would not be DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS as a game, it would be a test. Day still exists in D&D, light still exists. They're not in a dungeon, they're in an arena to test the power of the classes in combat. You're 100% not understanding the purpose of this experiment. It's meant to be an EXPERIMENT.
(Also, gaslighting is a really weird term to be used by you in this situation. How are we playing mind games to drive you insane by defending our positions?)
We're not trying to stack the battle in favor for the Wizard, we're trying to scientifically find which class is more effective in combat.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I agree. The Wizard is more likely to win, which I believe we would see if we had a way of simulating this. The Wizard has enough spell slots to counterspell some of the Warlock's eldritch blasts.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Night still exists in D&D, Darkness still exists in D&D, Dungeons still exist in D&D. These things exist along side Daylight and above ground areas. BOTH AREAS EXIST.
I haven't been saying that the battle should only take place in the dark. I've been saying that we should consider multiple different situations (although I've never suggested starting them off at less than maximum health, that was your idea). I've been told that we can't consider multiple different battlefield environments, and that the discussion needs to be limited to just one battlefield environment, one that we will tailor to the Wizard's desires.
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED] The fact of the matter is that this should be as close to a scientific experiment as we can get it. The scientific method has been used for hundreds of years, and is a way to guarantee accurate results in nearly any circumstance. If we want to accurately measure which class is more effective in combat, it's best to emulate this process as much as possible. We only need one arena, because that's how you can guarantee correct results.
[REDACTED]
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
All subsequent posts to this thread are to be kept on-topic and constructive in nature. Personal debate can be taken to Private Messages, as these posts do not need to be vented publicly.
Please sent me a Private Message with any questions or for further clarification.
In an arena style of fighting, i think the wizard takes it, due to prep time, but without time to prep, warlock takes it i think.
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
I love Homebrew
I hate paladins
Warrior Bovine
Even without preparation, the Abjuration Wizard's improved ability at both Dispel Magic and Counterspell is going to be a huge bonus. The extra 45hp in the Arcane Ward is also a huge bonus. But most of all, his advantage on saving throws against spells and his resistance to damage from spells are unlimited use always on abilities that will always be useful when facing a spellcaster. This might be enough to push it in the Abjuration Wizard's favor even when he's not prepared.
As long as the Abjuration Wizard is within 60 feet, they win. Otherwise, they probably win.
There is no dawn after eternal night.
Homebrew: Magic items, Subclasses
Every thing I have seen in this thread for warlocks winning. Is a scenario where the wizard does not have equal preparation as the warlock.
the warlock is specifically tailored to fight the wizard. But the wizard is not specifically tailored in the same vein to fight the warlock. I honestly just stopped responding to the homeristic takes at this point.
the headband of intellect comment especially. Doesn’t change. A single thing regarding a portent to make a guy fail other than decreasing the range of effective fail. Or the spell effects of feeblemind.
The big thing he’s missing about feeblemind with his headband of intellect. Is it specifically says you cannot cast spells, or activate magic items. Even if one wants to waste time arguing about magic items already activated. Congrats. You have a 19 int warlock with 1 charisma that cannot cast spells. Good luck.
Watch me on twitch
Unless your an Artificer, no magic items. Period.
There is no dawn after eternal night.
Homebrew: Magic items, Subclasses
Honestly, and I am asking as I don’t see how this keeps getting argued.
but the “darkness” scenario.
so... the wizard, is just going to be chilling, in darkness. Not seeing anything. While the warlock. Customized to see in darkness, doesn’t even have to set up the darkness himself. And this is considered a “fair” setting?
heres the reality of that:
wizard: “it’s dark” teleport.
wizard: “it’s dark.” Daylight.
wizard: “it’s dark.” I must be under attack. Invulnerability.
wizard: “it’s dark” I wish anything in this darkness with me that can see in the dark dies.
infinite scenarios of why the wizard isn’t just going to stand in the darkness, picking his nose, until a warlock attacks him.
the difference in spell power is just too drastic for the warlock. And the warlock just doesn’t have an effective way to bring the wizard down fast enough.
this is done by WoTC by design. This is the trade off for wizards and sorcerers being so squishy and easy to kill at lower levels. Is that end levels they are harder to kill. Balance.
i saw mention of things like alert feat for winning initiative, and I thought... why? Why not spell sniper to double casting ranges?
theres tons of variables and such. There’s tons of scenarios.
to Gabe’s point: “yes”. If we really bend over backwards and do a lot of favorable things for warlock and give the wizard handicaps the warlock can win.
but that’s not what the question was designed to ask. It was designed for a “full power vs full power. Straight up scenario. Who wins?”
Watch me on twitch
Got it. We're playing dungeons and dragons in a world with no darkness and no magic items. To have darkness or magic items available to level 20 characters is bending over backwards. Heck, even just starting off the two characters both behind cover is bending over backwards.
I've never said that I thought Warlock was better or more powerful. I've always said that I thought Abjuration Wizard is the best choice. But I'm shocked by the degree that people want to bend over backwards to cater to the Wizard's wishes. The Wizard is the more powerful option, he doesn't need you stacking the deck in his favor. Even in conditions set to favor the Warlock, the Wizard still probably wins.
It's funny, the question is apparently "full power vs full power, straight up scenario", but no magic items permitted. The Warlock can't give his Sprite a Ring of Spell Storing with Greater Restoration cast into it. Because that's too powerful. We want full power, except when we don't want full power.
I'll rephrase the question: Wizard 20 vs Warlock 20, where the Wizard gets to set the rules, who wins? We don't need a huge thread to answer this question. Wizard wins.