With all the feats that grant additional cantrips and spells, magical initiate, the strixhaven initiates, telekinesis, fey and shadow touched, etc, who all takes one of more of these feats as a bonus feat for variant human, custom lineage or when granted a feat at level 1 by the dm? Which feat is your fav and why?
I took the Telekinetic feat at 1st level for my variant human Abjuration wizard, and the Telepathic feat at 4th level(currently 5th level) to represent psionic abilities awakened by an encounter with a powerful Far Realm entity in his youth(part of his backstory).
With all the feats that grant additional cantrips and spells, magical initiate, the strixhaven initiates, telekinesis, fey and shadow touched, etc, who all takes one of more of these feats as a bonus feat for variant human, custom lineage or when granted a feat at level 1 by the dm? Which feat is your fav and why?
It really depends on the character concept and whether I need a half-feat to get INT to an even number, but my current wizard does have Fey Touched. As I'm being kind of a stickler with my spell book though, I'm only doing once a day casts on both spells (gift of alacrity was the optional one) rather than ever using slots on them
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)
Sure if they fit the character. As to which feat, that also depends on the character. For some Fey Touched is more appropriate, for others another feat may be more appropriate. It really all depends on the backstory as to why they got which feat.
Almost every wizard I play takes Fey Touched, a lot of other casters I play take it too. The spell half feats (Fey touched, Shadow Touched, telepathic) are common on all half and one-third casters I play, with some taking all 3 of them.
The rest are less common. I have never played in Strixhaven so I have not taken, nor seen those. I take magic initiate or artificer initiate often on Rogues, but rarely on other classes. Usually this is primarily for the cantrip (booming blade, green flame blade and minor illusion being the most common).
My favorite 1st level spell to take with either Magic Initiate or Fey touched is Hex. My favorite with Shadow Touched is Cause Fear. My favorite with artificer initiate is absorb elements.
If I play a spellcaster then the chances are really good that I would pick something with extra spells as one of my early feats.
If I play a wizard then my main go-to would be Fey Touched, and my favourite 1st level spell to take with this is Bless.
If I plan to multiclass a melee character into a gish or if they get spells as part of their subclass, then I usually like to get an early leg up with Magic Initiate if they like to cast a lot of spells. Or if I want some good cantrips and 1st level spells that normally wouldn't be available to me as a Cleric or a Warlock or whatever, then again I would choose Magic Initiate.
And speaking of Warlocks, I've taken Eldritch Adept for an Abjuration Wizard so I can spam Armour of Shadows and abuse the Arcane Ward class feature. I felt cheap as hell that day -- don't judge me. XD
But anyhoo, if I have to pick a favourite then I would say those were my top three, but really it depends on what I intend for my character.
To me, THE most important feat for a caster is Resilient (Constitution). With scrolls and rituals, i've never found a need for yet more magic options.
See that just goes to show there are so many different play styles. :-)
I have never taken resilient constitution, on any character, and never really thought poor constitution saves (most of my full casters actually have a 10 Con) were a big problem.
To me, THE most important feat for a caster is Resilient (Constitution). With scrolls and rituals, i've never found a need for yet more magic options.
See that just goes to show there are so many different play styles. :-)
I have never taken resilient constitution, on any character, and never really thought poor constitution saves (most of my full casters actually have a 10 Con) were a big problem.
Many of the best spells in the game use concentration. So either you're not using those spells, or your DM isn't playing his cards right to make you check concentration. With +0 on cons, you're going to be missing 1 out of 2 checks on average, which is a pretty big deal.
Cons is one of the most important ability scores for a Wizard. Ideally, unless you're a bladesinger, it should be the second highest after int. Resilent (cons) or Warcaster (if you're going to melee), are two of the most important feats a wizard can pick. For me Resilent(cons) is more important for a wizard than Warcaster, but that depends on the build. But if you have space, one of them should be taken as a wizard. I can't think of a more important feat than one of those two.
Many of the best spells in the game use concentration. So either you're not using those spells, or your DM isn't playing his cards right to make you check concentration. With +0 on cons, you're going to be missing 1 out of 2 checks on average, which is a pretty big deal.
Cons is one of the most important ability scores for a Wizard. Ideally, unless you're a bladesinger, it should be the second highest after int. Resilent (cons) or Warcaster (if you're going to melee), are two of the most important feats a wizard can pick. For me Resilent(cons) is more important for a wizard than Warcaster, but that depends on the build. But if you have space, one of them should be taken as a wizard. I can't think of a more important feat than one of those two.
If your caster is doing something high threat enough for the enemy to want to interrupt it then it may not matter that much what your CON save bonus actually is, as a lot of weaker attacks or a few high damage ones will often break concentration regardless. Personally my experience is that CON save bonuses for concentration matter most in the easier encounters where you just happen to get hit and might waste a nice, but non-critical, spell; so often it comes down to spell slot conservation rather than game-changing, at least most of the time.
It will depend a lot on the caster though; a Bladesinger who fights in melee absolutely wants some more protection if they can as they're so much more likely to be hit, but the ranged blaster hiding behind three-quarters cover probably isn't making a lot of concentration checks in the first place (or any if the party is very good at keeping enemies away from them).
On the topic, personally I'm a fan of extra spell feats; my groups typically play with a 3rd-level start with one free feat, so half-feats like Fey Touched, Shadow Touched etc. are a good way to ensure a +3 or even +4 on a spellcasting score. I'm also a fan of Magic Initiate in the same class, purely to get a free use of something I know I'll use a lot (on my current Wizard that's expeditious retreat, but rarely to run away) and since Wizards only have three cantrips as standard, being able to pick up two more is rarely a bad thing as it means more damage types in your base arsenal, or more utility etc.
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.
That a wizard needs cons to maintain his concentration seems indisputable to me. If you have a bad bonus, anything is going to make you lose it.
It's true that, at the end of the day, the biggest threat to your concentration is a lot of checks in a row (for example, with Magic Missile), or a very large amount of damage in a single attack. However if you have a low cons anything that hits you is going to be a high risk. And, furthermore, a good modifier to cons and PB or advantage will minimize you failing the check even in the two previous cases (a very large damage, or many hits in a row).
In my opinion, in general, the ability scores of a wizard will be fine if: - Int as high as possible. - Dex a bit for saves and AC (14 dex is usually enough). - Cons for constitution saves and some HP. Minimum 14, as I see it. But better if it can be a little higher. - str and char, to the garbage. You don't need them. - Wis, if you have points left. A little goes a long way for saves since you're proficient. But it is not a priority.
Regarding feats, resilient (cons) is a great option. But depending on your build, something will be better for you. In no case, in my opinion, a feat that gives you more magic. It's redundant and you're wasting a feat.
I take feats that give my characters extra spells sometimes. It depends on the needs of the rest of the party and what I'm building.
Sometimes I love taking feats that give my character extra spells, or that give spells to a non-spell casting class. And sometimes I don't take any feats at all. I try to never play the same build of character twice.
To me, THE most important feat for a caster is Resilient (Constitution). With scrolls and rituals, i've never found a need for yet more magic options.
See that just goes to show there are so many different play styles. :-)
I have never taken resilient constitution, on any character, and never really thought poor constitution saves (most of my full casters actually have a 10 Con) were a big problem.
Many of the best spells in the game use concentration. So either you're not using those spells, or your DM isn't playing his cards right to make you check concentration. With +0 on cons, you're going to be missing 1 out of 2 checks on average, which is a pretty big deal.
No I use those spells often and my DM makes concentration checks and at times I fail. I play some games using a VTT that does it automatically. The best defense against failing concentration is not to take damage in the first place and failing 1 out of every 2 checks is not that big a deal when you are only usually making 1 or 2 checks a day.
Sometimes if you fail it is not a big deal and you just cast it again.
If maintaining concentration is important, I find it is better to actively try to avoid damage than to have a good save. If keeping concentration is vital I will try to get behind full cover as that is the ideal way to keep concentration - it completely negates most attacks as well as most spells that would target you. If I can't get full cover, then partial cover, getting fully obscured or dropping prone can all reduce damage you take dramatically and one or more of those can usually be done without using an action. If it is really, really important to maintain concentration (say maintaining banishment until the BBEG gets stuck on his plane) you can use an action and try to hide or cast a spell like minor illusion or blink to even make you more difficult to target.
I am not saying I have never failed concentration, my multiclassed Arcane Trickster (with a 10 con) failed concentration on her Hideous Laughter spell Monday. She got hit with a fireball, failed the save, used Absorb elements and passed concentration with a 13, then got hit again the next turn with a fireball and failed her concentration save. But by that time the battle was mostly over anyway (and she was nearly dead).
Cons is one of the most important ability scores for a Wizard. Ideally, unless you're a bladesinger, it should be the second highest after int. Resilent (cons) or Warcaster (if you're going to melee), are two of the most important feats a wizard can pick. For me Resilent(cons) is more important for a wizard than Warcaster, but that depends on the build. But if you have space, one of them should be taken as a wizard. I can't think of a more important feat than one of those two.
Like I said I usually play a 10 con on a wizard. After intelligence my abilities importance depends on build but typically it is: Dex/Wis/Cha/Con/Strength. I put charisma about equal with con on a wizard. Charisma is far more useful out of combat and Charisma has interplay with spells like Friends and Charm Person, so if I have a 12 and a 10 left after the first 3, I will typically give the 12 to Charisma. Not always but usually.
I find Dex for AC and Wisdom for saving throws better at keeping concentration than constitution. Wisdom saves in particular will often make you drop concentration even if you take no damage and getting the AC boost on Dexterity can mean you don't even have to make the save.
That is my play style, but I have played it at a bunch of tables with a bunch of different DMs and found it successful. When I first started I put more in Constitution but as I got more experienced I shifted emphasis away from constitution on most builds except for Barbarians.
As far as warcaster I like it on melee Clerics. I don't like it on Wizards as much because they are not in position to get the OA a lot. Bladesingers are in position to use it, but they are so MAD I rarely have a spot for it. On Melee clerics Warcaster is awesome and it is even better if paired with booming blade and dissonant whispers (which takes a multiclass or 3 feats).
Playing a wizard with 10 constitution is suboptimal. You can look for a thousand ways to minimize the risk of getting hit but eventually you are going to take damage. And you can use those same methods, and have a decent constitution. They are not mutually exclusive things.
There are many ways to play a wizard, but playing with 10 in constitution is a bad idea. And it's not like you need those points you save elsewhere.
As for a few extra spells, they always come in handy. I don't know why some people say it's a waste. It never hurts to have more spells.
Playing a wizard with 10 constitution is suboptimal. You can look for a thousand ways to minimize the risk of getting hit but eventually you are going to take damage. And you can use those same methods, and have a decent constitution. They are not mutually exclusive things.
Certainaly you take damage eventually and when you do you fail concentration more often, but not often enough to justify prioritizing constitution.
The things I mentioned, other than full cover, are all more effective on a character with a high dexterity because the base chance of hit is lower and they compound with disadvantage. If you are using point buy or standard array you can not use all those same methods as effectively because you will be diverting numbers away from dexterity and those methods will not be as effective as they would on a high dex character.
The actual math proves this out.
For example: if you are facing a CR5 monster with a +6 attack bonus attacking a wizard in mage armor, dex and shield spell:
If the wizard is just standing there - The enemy needs a 15 to hit a character with 16 Dex vs a 12 vs a character with a 10 Dex. The same character needs a 7 to save concentration with a 16 con, vs a 10 with a 10 con.
So if one wizard has a 16Dex/10Con and the other has a 10Dex/16Con then mathematically either of these characters will lose concentration 13.5% of the time they are attacked or roughly 1 in every 7 attacks by said creature (assuming less than 22 damage per attack). So whether you invest in dexterity or you invest in constitution you will lose concentration at the same pace if you just stand there doing nothing. They are exactly the same in this case.
However, that is if the wizard just stands there and does nothing. On the other hand if the wizard causes disadvantage - so you drop prone or you put up a minor illusion in front of you then the numbers shift heavily in favor the high dex character:
If you cause disadvantage using the same 2 examples - the 16dex/10con Character will lose concentration about 4% of the times he is attacked, the 10Dex/16Con character will lose concentration 6% of the times he is attacked. So the high con character will be losing concentration more often. This is mostly because he is hit over twice as often.
Similarly if you get partial cover without disadvantage - if the same two wizards get half cover (+2 to AC). now the bad guy needs a 17 to hit the dex wizard and a 14 too hit the con wizard. Using the same +6 AB the dex wizard will lose concentration 9% of attacks, the con wizard will lose concentration on 10% of attacks. So the high Con wizard is losing concentration more often again.
Now that is not the whole story on concentration, but it does cover attacks which are the lions share of what causes damage. It also does not take into account that the low dex, high con character is using resources faster because he has a lower base AC, so he uses shield more often and he takes more damage so he uses hit dice or other healing more often to top himself back up.
There are many ways to play a wizard, but playing with 10 in constitution is a bad idea. And it's not like you need those points you save elsewhere.
I have played a lot of Wizards with a 14+ constitution back in the early days of 5E before I got more experience and I have played a lot with a 10 more recently and can say confidently I did not give up anything at all.
Generally for purely combat I prefer both Dex and Wisdom over constitution, because failing wisdom saves is devastating, more devastating than losing concentration. If we are talking about all 3 pillars I would put charisma ahead of Constitution too.
The best defence against losing concentration is don't take any concentration spells you don't need to; it's entirely possible to play a Wizard without any. My current Wizard only has one, which I mentioned already; it's the same expeditious retreat I gained from a feat for one free use, so I don't even remotely care if he loses concentration on it.
While eventually he might pick up more, Edward Merryspell is not averse to taking a sudden decisive nap behind cover to compensate for his poor AC and lack of mage armor because his job in combat is to create chaos (that the rest of the party can then exploit) and he does it pretty well, though he's also primarily a weird utility mule. His favoured attacks are his familiar using Help to grant advantage for a catapultchromatic orb or ray of sickness, while his unseen servant tips things over and then tidies them back up again as a distraction.
The idea that he would need to build for concentration saves is insane, because the first consideration should always be what will help me to build the character I want to be, and Edward Merryspell is not an archmage who stands and fights a wizardly duel, he's the guy who disappears into a rope trick if things are going badly wrong.
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.
I don't agree at all with what you're saying about the cons of a wizard. But it's not just my thing. It's what I've always seen. But also, out of curiosity, I've been looking at what people are saying in specialized articles. Everyone agrees that a wizard needs a good cons.
Honestly, I think that your belief is due to the way your DM is approaching the game, which is suboptimal I think.
I don't agree at all with what you're saying about the cons of a wizard. But it's not just my thing. It's what I've always seen. But also, out of curiosity, I've been looking at what people are saying in specialized articles. Everyone agrees that a wizard needs a good cons.
Articles online are always obsessed with white-room power gaming and hyper optimisation, they tend to have little or no bearing whatsoever on what D&D is actually like to play, as it's entirely possible to have fun with a "sub-optimal" character. Even if your games are all about optimisation, as ECMO3 says Constitution is not always the best way to defend against concentration saves, as a high Dexterity can be just as, if not more, effective by preventing the saves in the first place. In fact prevention in general is always better, and that includes both not being hit, and also not concentrating on something where it's going to be a critical loss if it ends early.
What matters first and foremost is what type of character the player wants to play, then what that character is actually intended to do in combat; power builds might rely on concentration spells to squeeze out every last bit of damage that they can, but that doesn't mean that every Wizard should or has to.
Besides which, this all getting increasingly off topic, the question is do you use feats for additional spells; for some people the answer may be "no" because in their meta they're punished for having low Constitution, or at least they believe they will be, that's fine, but it doesn't really need to be a whole thing about which is the better answer (because there isn't, and will never be, a "correct" answer to what you want for your character, only a right one for you).
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.
I don't agree at all with what you're saying about the cons of a wizard. But it's not just my thing. It's what I've always seen. But also, out of curiosity, I've been looking at what people are saying in specialized articles. Everyone agrees that a wizard needs a good cons.
Honestly, I think that your belief is due to the way your DM is approaching the game, which is suboptimal I think.
I have played with numerous DMs, 7 in the last year alone, from 4 different countries. I will say that DMs who rigidly apply the rules for difficult terrain and cover will tend to favor using a lower constitution.
The White Room used by a lot of optimizers has no walls, no chokepoints, no difficult terrain, no other PCs to hide behind. Some DMs handwave cover and handwave difficult terrain and that will make it more difficult for Wizards in general, because they can't use terrain and cover to their advantage, but DMs that do that are not really playing by the RAW. Even if they are handwaving those rules or playing in a whiteroom though, the math does not generally support the hypothesis that constitution is more important than dexterity..
With all the feats that grant additional cantrips and spells, magical initiate, the strixhaven initiates, telekinesis, fey and shadow touched, etc, who all takes one of more of these feats as a bonus feat for variant human, custom lineage or when granted a feat at level 1 by the dm? Which feat is your fav and why?
I took the Telekinetic feat at 1st level for my variant human Abjuration wizard, and the Telepathic feat at 4th level(currently 5th level) to represent psionic abilities awakened by an encounter with a powerful Far Realm entity in his youth(part of his backstory).
It really depends on the character concept and whether I need a half-feat to get INT to an even number, but my current wizard does have Fey Touched. As I'm being kind of a stickler with my spell book though, I'm only doing once a day casts on both spells (gift of alacrity was the optional one) rather than ever using slots on them
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)
Sure if they fit the character. As to which feat, that also depends on the character. For some Fey Touched is more appropriate, for others another feat may be more appropriate. It really all depends on the backstory as to why they got which feat.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
These are some of the most common feats I take.
Almost every wizard I play takes Fey Touched, a lot of other casters I play take it too. The spell half feats (Fey touched, Shadow Touched, telepathic) are common on all half and one-third casters I play, with some taking all 3 of them.
The rest are less common. I have never played in Strixhaven so I have not taken, nor seen those. I take magic initiate or artificer initiate often on Rogues, but rarely on other classes. Usually this is primarily for the cantrip (booming blade, green flame blade and minor illusion being the most common).
My favorite 1st level spell to take with either Magic Initiate or Fey touched is Hex. My favorite with Shadow Touched is Cause Fear. My favorite with artificer initiate is absorb elements.
If I play a spellcaster then the chances are really good that I would pick something with extra spells as one of my early feats.
If I play a wizard then my main go-to would be Fey Touched, and my favourite 1st level spell to take with this is Bless.
If I plan to multiclass a melee character into a gish or if they get spells as part of their subclass, then I usually like to get an early leg up with Magic Initiate if they like to cast a lot of spells. Or if I want some good cantrips and 1st level spells that normally wouldn't be available to me as a Cleric or a Warlock or whatever, then again I would choose Magic Initiate.
And speaking of Warlocks, I've taken Eldritch Adept for an Abjuration Wizard so I can spam Armour of Shadows and abuse the Arcane Ward class feature. I felt cheap as hell that day -- don't judge me. XD
But anyhoo, if I have to pick a favourite then I would say those were my top three, but really it depends on what I intend for my character.
meh.
To me, THE most important feat for a caster is Resilient (Constitution). With scrolls and rituals, i've never found a need for yet more magic options.
Guide to the Five Factions (PWYW)
Deck of Decks
See that just goes to show there are so many different play styles. :-)
I have never taken resilient constitution, on any character, and never really thought poor constitution saves (most of my full casters actually have a 10 Con) were a big problem.
I personally usually will take magical initiate or one of the strixhaven initiate feats if I get a level 1 feat or am a V-human.
Many of the best spells in the game use concentration. So either you're not using those spells, or your DM isn't playing his cards right to make you check concentration. With +0 on cons, you're going to be missing 1 out of 2 checks on average, which is a pretty big deal.
Cons is one of the most important ability scores for a Wizard. Ideally, unless you're a bladesinger, it should be the second highest after int. Resilent (cons) or Warcaster (if you're going to melee), are two of the most important feats a wizard can pick. For me Resilent(cons) is more important for a wizard than Warcaster, but that depends on the build. But if you have space, one of them should be taken as a wizard. I can't think of a more important feat than one of those two.
If your caster is doing something high threat enough for the enemy to want to interrupt it then it may not matter that much what your CON save bonus actually is, as a lot of weaker attacks or a few high damage ones will often break concentration regardless. Personally my experience is that CON save bonuses for concentration matter most in the easier encounters where you just happen to get hit and might waste a nice, but non-critical, spell; so often it comes down to spell slot conservation rather than game-changing, at least most of the time.
It will depend a lot on the caster though; a Bladesinger who fights in melee absolutely wants some more protection if they can as they're so much more likely to be hit, but the ranged blaster hiding behind three-quarters cover probably isn't making a lot of concentration checks in the first place (or any if the party is very good at keeping enemies away from them).
On the topic, personally I'm a fan of extra spell feats; my groups typically play with a 3rd-level start with one free feat, so half-feats like Fey Touched, Shadow Touched etc. are a good way to ensure a +3 or even +4 on a spellcasting score. I'm also a fan of Magic Initiate in the same class, purely to get a free use of something I know I'll use a lot (on my current Wizard that's expeditious retreat, but rarely to run away) and since Wizards only have three cantrips as standard, being able to pick up two more is rarely a bad thing as it means more damage types in your base arsenal, or more utility etc.
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.
That a wizard needs cons to maintain his concentration seems indisputable to me. If you have a bad bonus, anything is going to make you lose it.
It's true that, at the end of the day, the biggest threat to your concentration is a lot of checks in a row (for example, with Magic Missile), or a very large amount of damage in a single attack. However if you have a low cons anything that hits you is going to be a high risk. And, furthermore, a good modifier to cons and PB or advantage will minimize you failing the check even in the two previous cases (a very large damage, or many hits in a row).
In my opinion, in general, the ability scores of a wizard will be fine if:
- Int as high as possible.
- Dex a bit for saves and AC (14 dex is usually enough).
- Cons for constitution saves and some HP. Minimum 14, as I see it. But better if it can be a little higher.
- str and char, to the garbage. You don't need them.
- Wis, if you have points left. A little goes a long way for saves since you're proficient. But it is not a priority.
Regarding feats, resilient (cons) is a great option. But depending on your build, something will be better for you. In no case, in my opinion, a feat that gives you more magic. It's redundant and you're wasting a feat.
I take feats that give my characters extra spells sometimes. It depends on the needs of the rest of the party and what I'm building.
Sometimes I love taking feats that give my character extra spells, or that give spells to a non-spell casting class. And sometimes I don't take any feats at all. I try to never play the same build of character twice.
Professional computer geek
No I use those spells often and my DM makes concentration checks and at times I fail. I play some games using a VTT that does it automatically. The best defense against failing concentration is not to take damage in the first place and failing 1 out of every 2 checks is not that big a deal when you are only usually making 1 or 2 checks a day.
Sometimes if you fail it is not a big deal and you just cast it again.
If maintaining concentration is important, I find it is better to actively try to avoid damage than to have a good save. If keeping concentration is vital I will try to get behind full cover as that is the ideal way to keep concentration - it completely negates most attacks as well as most spells that would target you. If I can't get full cover, then partial cover, getting fully obscured or dropping prone can all reduce damage you take dramatically and one or more of those can usually be done without using an action. If it is really, really important to maintain concentration (say maintaining banishment until the BBEG gets stuck on his plane) you can use an action and try to hide or cast a spell like minor illusion or blink to even make you more difficult to target.
I am not saying I have never failed concentration, my multiclassed Arcane Trickster (with a 10 con) failed concentration on her Hideous Laughter spell Monday. She got hit with a fireball, failed the save, used Absorb elements and passed concentration with a 13, then got hit again the next turn with a fireball and failed her concentration save. But by that time the battle was mostly over anyway (and she was nearly dead).
Here is her sheet:
Xane's Character Sheet - D&D Beyond (dndbeyond.com)
Like I said I usually play a 10 con on a wizard. After intelligence my abilities importance depends on build but typically it is: Dex/Wis/Cha/Con/Strength. I put charisma about equal with con on a wizard. Charisma is far more useful out of combat and Charisma has interplay with spells like Friends and Charm Person, so if I have a 12 and a 10 left after the first 3, I will typically give the 12 to Charisma. Not always but usually.
I find Dex for AC and Wisdom for saving throws better at keeping concentration than constitution. Wisdom saves in particular will often make you drop concentration even if you take no damage and getting the AC boost on Dexterity can mean you don't even have to make the save.
That is my play style, but I have played it at a bunch of tables with a bunch of different DMs and found it successful. When I first started I put more in Constitution but as I got more experienced I shifted emphasis away from constitution on most builds except for Barbarians.
As far as warcaster I like it on melee Clerics. I don't like it on Wizards as much because they are not in position to get the OA a lot. Bladesingers are in position to use it, but they are so MAD I rarely have a spot for it. On Melee clerics Warcaster is awesome and it is even better if paired with booming blade and dissonant whispers (which takes a multiclass or 3 feats).
Playing a wizard with 10 constitution is suboptimal. You can look for a thousand ways to minimize the risk of getting hit but eventually you are going to take damage. And you can use those same methods, and have a decent constitution. They are not mutually exclusive things.
There are many ways to play a wizard, but playing with 10 in constitution is a bad idea. And it's not like you need those points you save elsewhere.
As for a few extra spells, they always come in handy. I don't know why some people say it's a waste. It never hurts to have more spells.
Certainaly you take damage eventually and when you do you fail concentration more often, but not often enough to justify prioritizing constitution.
The things I mentioned, other than full cover, are all more effective on a character with a high dexterity because the base chance of hit is lower and they compound with disadvantage. If you are using point buy or standard array you can not use all those same methods as effectively because you will be diverting numbers away from dexterity and those methods will not be as effective as they would on a high dex character.
The actual math proves this out.
For example: if you are facing a CR5 monster with a +6 attack bonus attacking a wizard in mage armor, dex and shield spell:
If the wizard is just standing there - The enemy needs a 15 to hit a character with 16 Dex vs a 12 vs a character with a 10 Dex. The same character needs a 7 to save concentration with a 16 con, vs a 10 with a 10 con.
So if one wizard has a 16Dex/10Con and the other has a 10Dex/16Con then mathematically either of these characters will lose concentration 13.5% of the time they are attacked or roughly 1 in every 7 attacks by said creature (assuming less than 22 damage per attack). So whether you invest in dexterity or you invest in constitution you will lose concentration at the same pace if you just stand there doing nothing. They are exactly the same in this case.
However, that is if the wizard just stands there and does nothing. On the other hand if the wizard causes disadvantage - so you drop prone or you put up a minor illusion in front of you then the numbers shift heavily in favor the high dex character:
If you cause disadvantage using the same 2 examples - the 16dex/10con Character will lose concentration about 4% of the times he is attacked, the 10Dex/16Con character will lose concentration 6% of the times he is attacked. So the high con character will be losing concentration more often. This is mostly because he is hit over twice as often.
Similarly if you get partial cover without disadvantage - if the same two wizards get half cover (+2 to AC). now the bad guy needs a 17 to hit the dex wizard and a 14 too hit the con wizard. Using the same +6 AB the dex wizard will lose concentration 9% of attacks, the con wizard will lose concentration on 10% of attacks. So the high Con wizard is losing concentration more often again.
Now that is not the whole story on concentration, but it does cover attacks which are the lions share of what causes damage. It also does not take into account that the low dex, high con character is using resources faster because he has a lower base AC, so he uses shield more often and he takes more damage so he uses hit dice or other healing more often to top himself back up.
I have played a lot of Wizards with a 14+ constitution back in the early days of 5E before I got more experience and I have played a lot with a 10 more recently and can say confidently I did not give up anything at all.
Generally for purely combat I prefer both Dex and Wisdom over constitution, because failing wisdom saves is devastating, more devastating than losing concentration. If we are talking about all 3 pillars I would put charisma ahead of Constitution too.
The best defence against losing concentration is don't take any concentration spells you don't need to; it's entirely possible to play a Wizard without any. My current Wizard only has one, which I mentioned already; it's the same expeditious retreat I gained from a feat for one free use, so I don't even remotely care if he loses concentration on it.
While eventually he might pick up more, Edward Merryspell is not averse to taking a sudden decisive nap behind cover to compensate for his poor AC and lack of mage armor because his job in combat is to create chaos (that the rest of the party can then exploit) and he does it pretty well, though he's also primarily a weird utility mule. His favoured attacks are his familiar using Help to grant advantage for a
catapultchromatic orb or ray of sickness, while his unseen servant tips things over and then tidies them back up again as a distraction.The idea that he would need to build for concentration saves is insane, because the first consideration should always be what will help me to build the character I want to be, and Edward Merryspell is not an archmage who stands and fights a wizardly duel, he's the guy who disappears into a rope trick if things are going badly wrong.
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.
I don't agree at all with what you're saying about the cons of a wizard. But it's not just my thing. It's what I've always seen. But also, out of curiosity, I've been looking at what people are saying in specialized articles. Everyone agrees that a wizard needs a good cons.
Honestly, I think that your belief is due to the way your DM is approaching the game, which is suboptimal I think.
Articles online are always obsessed with white-room power gaming and hyper optimisation, they tend to have little or no bearing whatsoever on what D&D is actually like to play, as it's entirely possible to have fun with a "sub-optimal" character. Even if your games are all about optimisation, as ECMO3 says Constitution is not always the best way to defend against concentration saves, as a high Dexterity can be just as, if not more, effective by preventing the saves in the first place. In fact prevention in general is always better, and that includes both not being hit, and also not concentrating on something where it's going to be a critical loss if it ends early.
What matters first and foremost is what type of character the player wants to play, then what that character is actually intended to do in combat; power builds might rely on concentration spells to squeeze out every last bit of damage that they can, but that doesn't mean that every Wizard should or has to.
Besides which, this all getting increasingly off topic, the question is do you use feats for additional spells; for some people the answer may be "no" because in their meta they're punished for having low Constitution, or at least they believe they will be, that's fine, but it doesn't really need to be a whole thing about which is the better answer (because there isn't, and will never be, a "correct" answer to what you want for your character, only a right one for you).
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.
I have played with numerous DMs, 7 in the last year alone, from 4 different countries. I will say that DMs who rigidly apply the rules for difficult terrain and cover will tend to favor using a lower constitution.
The White Room used by a lot of optimizers has no walls, no chokepoints, no difficult terrain, no other PCs to hide behind. Some DMs handwave cover and handwave difficult terrain and that will make it more difficult for Wizards in general, because they can't use terrain and cover to their advantage, but DMs that do that are not really playing by the RAW. Even if they are handwaving those rules or playing in a whiteroom though, the math does not generally support the hypothesis that constitution is more important than dexterity..