So, a fear about this new packet: the rise of the spellcaster...

Despite the fact that I love this packet overall, I am having one major fear: the rise of the spellcaster!

The druid looks a little overpowered. I noticed that right away. But, then I got to looking over the wizard's spell list. They lowered martial damage, but they also raised spellcasting damage. I am actually worried that the wizard clearly overshadows the fighter again. At some point in time I will go out and do a bunch of math. In the meantime, I am curious, what are people's playtest experiences?


  

The 5e of D&D: its like a more balanced version of 2e, but with the character customization frills of 3e and 4e. I love it!

if they made this thread title into a movie i would preorder tickets 3 years in advance and dress like gandolf at the primier. but i am not worried the math they said in the podcast will be worked out if its not perfect in this packet.
The wizard's high damage output is well balanced by the very limited number of spell slots. (though I have yet to actually test it out)
Outshadowing the fighter (or anyone else for that matter . ) for ONE round is no big deal
Try radiance RPG. A complete D20 game that supports fantasy and steampunk. Download the FREE PDF here: http://www.radiancerpg.com
I brought this up in the other thread but i think a cleric with channel wrath and inflict is going to out do the martial classes by a fair margin.  I don't even know about the wizard.

They don't do it for one round. Right now, even some 2nd level spells are giving a fighter's 20th level attacks a run for their money. That gives them 14 rounds in which they can overshadow a fighter. And, their cantrips are not so far behind that the fighter will be at a clear advantage after those 14 rounds. I think they swung too far in the other direction in response to the martial characters doing a little too much damage in prior packets...

I mean, I need to run some actual math. Maybe that will change my mind. But, I am getting a little worried... 

I brought this up in the other thread but i think a cleric with channel wrath and inflict is going to out do the martial classes by a fair margin.  I don't even know about the wizard.



Eeks. You are right. There is a lot of good in this packet, but this isn't part of it! They NEED to get the spellcasters and the martial characters balanced again. This sort of imbalance is one of the few things that can get me to drop an edition (despite the fact that I like so much of what they are doing otherwise)!

But again, maybe I need to run some math. I don't want to jump to conclusions.

(I have to say, some of the changes to heroic surge don't help this situation. Two attacks with a maximum bonus of +6 damage from your XD isn't enough to balance against the epic spells.)
not that it has much to do with this subject but this is an awsome story and i wanted to share charactergen.net/my-mom-plays-pathfinder... its awsome and i want to play a game with her
Sure... the wizard throws out more punishment.  But he is a big 'ol squishy.  The number and efficacy of defensive spells is greatly reduced from the last vancian edition (3e) and he has much lower hitpoints.  

Is the Wizard doing too much damage?  Well, that is a tough thing to answer.  Vancian casting is limited, but it also means that with less encounters and shorter ecounters, the Wizard will be looking pretty boss.  On a long day with long encounters... wizard is going to struggle a bit, same as always

But too much damage?  No I don't think so.  The only time the wizard will be looking like a king is when there are nicely clustered groups for him to drop AOE spells on to.  Even some of the best spells like sunbeam are only going to match the fighter's damage against a single target.  Things like disintegrate, yeah it hits like a truck.  But you only get 1 per day.

Either way, this is balanced by the lack of defense and the low HP.  You can argue that such losses are made up with utility, and I would agree, but a wizard spending his limited spell slots on utility is reducing his combat prowess simultaneously, so I think it works out. 
The Druid being a bit overpowered is expected, since it's a new class. The others might be a concern, but remember that this stuff will swing back and forth a lot, probably intentionally (so they can see how people feel about the balance they strike).

On a separate note, I agree the new expertise dice stuff is underwhelming.
I brought this up in the other thread but i think a cleric with channel wrath and inflict is going to out do the martial classes by a fair margin.  I don't even know about the wizard.



This is limited though.  Channel 5/day, Inflict 3/day (unless you start downgrading slots)
Im not convinced tha the Cleric will be out damaging the fighter, but it is something to keep an eye on.

Oh, dear, lord... the cantrips are actually better (EDIT: that is a bit of a hyperbole, but they are very close in affectivity) than fighter attacks. They don't use attacks anymore. They use saves. That means that they just went from a hit rate that matched the fighters to a hit rate that is far better than the fighters. And, their damage is pretty much just as good as a fighters. All they are missing out on is the stat bonus to damage. Yea, this is borked.

I am fine with the way expertise dice are currently working. Martial characters were doing too much damage before. But, reducing their damage and drastically increasing spellcaster damage was a big mistake. As much as I loved this packet, this change is rapidly turning me off...

I don't think cantrip damage is "just as good" as a fighter's. Level 1 wizard is flinging 1d8 cold damage on a ray of frost (~DC 14) against an an orc (10 Dex). That's a 65% hit rate. Level 1 fighter with +4 attack deals 1d8+3 against the orc (AC 13), which is a 60% hit rate. I'd take the +3 damage over +5% chance to hit.

At level 5, the cold damage bumps up to 2d8, while the fighter's damage is more like 2d8+3. You can calculate DPR, but it really varies by monster, since some might have higher Dex or armor.

And this is a sword+board fighter who isn't necessarily all about offense. Surely a great-weapon wielder, a rogue, or a barbarian is easily outdamaging the wizard cantrip. Plus the fighter expertise dice are encounter resources and not daily, like a wizard's non-cantrip spells.
Yes, Casters are doing way too much damage (or rather, Fighters are doing way too little damage).  That isn't important.  Seriously.  What is important right now is that Saving Throws do not scale, while Save DCs do scale.  The 3e problem of Saving Throw DCs outscaling Saves is way, way worse in 5e.  Effectively everyone has *worse* than bad saves in every category, AND there are more categories, so you can't even begin to dream about stat pumping even a fraction of categories.  That 1st level NPC's Save-or-Suck effects are just as dangerous to a 20th level character as to a 1st level character.  If the 20th level caster targets someone, well, pity that person.  A level 19 caster will have Save DCs of 20.  Good luck on that.  More modestly, at level 9 the DCs are 17.  Fortunately, Heighten Spell is only 1/day, so if you miraculously save against the first, heightened spell, you might have a 35% change of saving against the follow-up one.......

(The same problem occurs for opposed checks, like Grapple.  5e's scaling is currently completely SNAFU'd, and they don't have much time to avoid FUBAR) 
I don't think cantrip damage is "just as good" as a fighter's. Level 1 wizard is flinging 1d8 cold damage on a ray of frost (~DC 14) against an an orc (10 Dex). That's a 65% hit rate. Level 1 fighter with +4 attack deals 1d8+3 against the orc (AC 13), which is a 60% hit rate. I'd take the +3 damage over +5% chance to hit.

At level 5, the cold damage bumps up to 2d8, while the fighter's damage is more like 2d8+3. You can calculate DPR, but it really varies by monster, since some might have higher Dex or armor.

And this is a sword+board fighter who isn't necessarily all about offense. Surely a great-weapon wielder, a rogue, or a barbarian is easily outdamaging the wizard cantrip. Plus the fighter expertise dice are encounter resources and not daily, like a wizard's non-cantrip spells.




I just want to post some numbers to make my point. A fire giant has a Dex bonus of 0 and an AC of 18. A 20th level fighter has an attack bonus of +10. Even if we assume that he has the ability that lets him add an XD to his attack, he has only a 82.5% chance of hitting. Meanwhile, the wizard will hit 95% of the time. So, the wizard's DPR with ray of frost is 21.375. The fighter's DPR with a longsword will be 23.7875. That is if you can spend your XD as a flat bonus to attack. Only one fighter option gives them that ability. The fighter can only use that for 6 times per encounter, so this power isn’t even really at-will. If the fighter doesn’t use any XD his DPR will be 21.725. Sure, a fighter could opt for a greatsword, but this still seems way too close. I mean, this is a fighter’s area of forte vs. a wizards at-will cantrip. We haven’t even looked at what the wizard can do once it starts using its daily spells! Such a fighter is never going to be able to catch up to the wizard at any point in time during the day, even when it is using its encounter based resources. Meanwhile, with at least 12 daily resources that can put what the fighter is doing to shame, the argument that the wizard deserves better because it is using daily resources doesn't really hold water. There will be many a day when the wizard never even gets to burn through all 12 of its daily resources. Not that it needs to, considering how great its cantrips are compared to what a fighter can do at-will...


I realize this is just one case, but this should NEVER be true against ANY monster EVER. A wizard's cantrips should never compare to what a fighter can do at-will. Being far inferior when it comes to at-will capabilities is the only thing that justifies powerful daily spells. They both boosted the cantrips to the point where they are almost as good as what fighters can do at-will and gave the wizard very powerful daily spells. That is a horrendous breach of balance.  

While I like a lot of what this packet does, its caster vs. non-caster balance just swung clear into the "I will not buy" zone. Don't get me wrong, I realize this is a playtest. I am not going anywhere. I am just saying, this needs to be fixed. Cantrips need to be nerfed. After that, some careful math needs to be run on the daily spells. The amoung of damage a fighter can deal using heroic surge should be in the same range as a 6th, 7th, 8th, or 9th level spell. I don't know that they are anymore... 

Yes, Casters are doing way too much damage (or rather, Fighters are doing way too little damage).  That isn't important.  Seriously.  What is important right now is that Saving Throws do not scale, while Save DCs do scale.  The 3e problem of Saving Throw DCs outscaling Saves is way, way worse in 5e.  Effectively everyone has *worse* than bad saves in every category, AND there are more categories, so you can't even begin to dream about stat pumping even a fraction of categories.  That 1st level NPC's Save-or-Suck effects are just as dangerous to a 20th level character as to a 1st level character.  If the 20th level caster targets someone, well, pity that person.  A level 19 caster will have Save DCs of 20.  Good luck on that.  More modestly, at level 9 the DCs are 17.  Fortunately, Heighten Spell is only 1/day, so if you miraculously save against the first, heightened spell, you might have a 35% change of saving against the follow-up one.......

(The same problem occurs for opposed checks, like Grapple.  5e's scaling is currently completely SNAFU'd, and they don't have much time to avoid FUBAR) 



Seconded.  
Saving throws being a flat progression (by which I mean, not based on the level of the spell but the level of the caster) is a good thing.

The way that saving throws work?  Terrible terrible terrible.  

Easiest fix?  Change saving throws to be defenses, but instead of being 10+mod, just use the ability score as-is.  
So a wizard will be attacking Dexterity with a fireball.  At 5th level with a +3 int mod, he will have a +5, so an 80% chance to land on a target with a 10 dex and a 30% chance to land on a target with a 20 dex... pretty reasonable, and far better than the current system.
In the current system the chance of the spell landing would be  30% for the 10 dex guy (slightly higher because of the meet-or-beat rules) but only a 50% for the guy with a 20 dex.  Targeting actual ability scores will help to keep spellcasting in check... 
Yes, Casters are doing way too much damage (or rather, Fighters are doing way too little damage).  That isn't important.  Seriously.  What is important right now is that Saving Throws do not scale, while Save DCs do scale.  The 3e problem of Saving Throw DCs outscaling Saves is way, way worse in 5e.  Effectively everyone has *worse* than bad saves in every category, AND there are more categories, so you can't even begin to dream about stat pumping even a fraction of categories.  That 1st level NPC's Save-or-Suck effects are just as dangerous to a 20th level character as to a 1st level character.  If the 20th level caster targets someone, well, pity that person.  A level 19 caster will have Save DCs of 20.  Good luck on that.  More modestly, at level 9 the DCs are 17.  Fortunately, Heighten Spell is only 1/day, so if you miraculously save against the first, heightened spell, you might have a 35% change of saving against the follow-up one.......

(The same problem occurs for opposed checks, like Grapple.  5e's scaling is currently completely SNAFU'd, and they don't have much time to avoid FUBAR) 



 They need 2nd ed saves. Scaling saves vs DC 20 or DC 10 to 15 spell DCs but a fixed number. Porbably DC10.

 Fear is the Mind Killer

 

Hm. In the podcast they mentioned LOWERING cantrip damage. Maybe that didn't make this packet?
I realize this is just one case, but this should NEVER be true against ANY monster EVER. A wizard's cantrips should never compare to what a fighter can do at-will. Being far inferior when it comes to at-will capabilities is the only thing that justifies powerful daily spells. They both boosted the cantrips to the point where they are almost as good as what fighters can do at-will and gave the wizard very powerful daily spells. That is a horrendous breach of balance.

Interesting premise. You count a 6d6 fireball as "putting the fighter to shame", in spite of dealing less damage on a hit? I guess it might be easier to hit with the fireball, and it still does ~10 damage on a miss, if the enemy isn't immune to fire.

From my perspective, the wizard ends up with about 6 spells that are better than fighter strike, six more that have versatility as a benefit, and otherwise the wizard is inferior.

The metagame is not the game.

Hm. In the podcast they mentioned LOWERING cantrip damage. Maybe that didn't make this packet?



They did, sort of.  What they actually did was drop the initial (level 1) damage from 1d10 to 1d8, but then spread the progression out over more bumps to 5d8 instead of 4d10.

So... they dropped cantrip damage from level 1 to 4. 

Hm. In the podcast they mentioned LOWERING cantrip damage. Maybe that didn't make this packet?



They did lower the damage, sort of. They lowered the damage die. Endgame ray of frost now does 5d8 instead of 4d10. But, that isn't actually lower damage (except at level 1, when it does a 1d8 instead of 1d10). And, they removed its attack roll and made it a Dex save. Right now, it is usually far harder for a creature to make a save than to be missed by an attack. That is to say, the statistical probability of achieving a full attack success is easier when you are not attacking and a creature is making a save. So, the end result is that they actually made cantrips a good deal more powerful end-game. And they made a number of the daily spells a good deal more powerful at the same time. And they lowered martial damage. Which leaves martial characters hurting badly...
I dont think you can compare end game too closely. That part is gonna be way out of whack depending on who uses their burst skills, and you're also looking at utility balance and all the other goodies classes get.

Compare levels 1-10 and see what you get for damage purposes. Then look at say 11-15. Then finally 16-20.

I would be very very surprised if wizard cantrips are anything even remotely close to fighter basic damage. There might be points where wizard comes closer, but for most levels, fighter is going to be way ahead, surely.

Also average damage is not always a great indicator. Potential max damage must also be taken into account (not sure if that is better of worse in this case!)
The druid looks a little overpowered. I noticed that right away. But, then I got to looking over the wizard's spell list. They lowered martial damage, but they also raised spellcasting damage. I am actually worried that the wizard clearly overshadows the fighter again. At some point in time I will go out and do a bunch of math. In the meantime, I am curious, what are people's playtest experiences? 

I'm running the D&DE playtest (Cult of Chaos).  I have found that the wizard demolishes more than his share of enemies.  AtCoC is weighted towards pretty low hp monsters, though, so when an AE goes off and half damage is enough to kill them, it's just a clean sweep. Still, thinking about it, except in the 'wave' combat where he ran out of slots, the wizard has probably accounted for close to half the enemies in most combats.  He favors sleep and thunderwave and has maximize.  Bigger monsters fall the barbarian more often than not.  This is prior to the most recent packet, of course.

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

The wizard will always be good at damaging lots of little enemies. It's pretty much his thing.
I want to point out that the Spells Vs Saves idea forces me to roll a lot of dice behind my screen.

Say I've got 3 casters attacking a truckload of orcs. A flame strike and a fireball go off.

Now I'm rolling truckload x D20s. And, TBH, I am far too lazy for that.

I'm leaning toward having the players roll spell attacks vs monsters' ability scores.
The wizard will always be good at damaging lots of little enemies. It's pretty much his thing.

That was my thought, yes.  "little" though isn't just 3hp kobolds when you have maximize.   I was surprised it had no preq.

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

I realize this is just one case, but this should NEVER be true against ANY monster EVER. A wizard's cantrips should never compare to what a fighter can do at-will. Being far inferior when it comes to at-will capabilities is the only thing that justifies powerful daily spells. They both boosted the cantrips to the point where they are almost as good as what fighters can do at-will and gave the wizard very powerful daily spells. That is a horrendous breach of balance.

Interesting premise. You count a 6d6 fireball as "putting the fighter to shame", in spite of dealing less damage on a hit? I guess it might be easier to hit with the fireball, and it still does ~10 damage on a miss, if the enemy isn't immune to fire.

From my perspective, the wizard ends up with about 6 spells that are better than fighter strike, six more that have versatility as a benefit, and otherwise the wizard is inferior.




No. A 3rd level fireball does not put a 20th level fighter at-will attack to shame. But stinking cloud, which now does 6d6 damage when you first cast it and creates an area of ongoing damage starts to. It might not deal quite as much damage, but it gets close, and it lets the wizard control the battlefield in a way that a fighter can never really hope to. It is also an AoE, and one that does put volley/whirlwind to shame (which is true of fireball as well). Meanwhile ice storm is dealing 2d8+4d6 damage (again, in an AoE), and cloudkill/cone of cold are flat out in the fighter range of damage (but also dealing great extra effects/dealing that damage to an AoE). Maybe I would be ok with that (so long as a fighter is doing more single target damage than a wizard's 6-9th level spells when he is using a heroic surge), but not if a wizard's cantrip is as horrendously souped up as it is right now. By the time the wizard starts using its cantrips any fighter, whether they are dual wielding, wielding a two-handed weapon, or wielding a sword and board, should be the clear winner at least when it comes to (both) damage (and survivability). 

I wouldn't worry too much about this - it'll clearly swing back and forth a bit. I mean, the monk was a killing machine for a while, then the barbarian ate him for breakfast, and now he's probably bottom of the non-caster classes.
This is no good. WotC please change it.
Khyber is a dark and dangerous place, full of flame and smoke, where ever stranger things lie dormant.
I wonder if we can get a math guy...where is lokair at? Have some one take the defualt stat array and run through all saves vs best attack stat the array gives...

Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?

I dont think you can compare end game too closely. That part is gonna be way out of whack depending on who uses their burst skills, and you're also looking at utility balance and all the other goodies classes get. 

Compare levels 1-10 and see what you get for damage purposes. Then look at say 11-15. Then finally 16-20.



1) Spellcasters are clear winners when it comes to utility power. 

2) I flat out reject the notion that it is ok for the game to be imbalanced endgame.

3) Fighters don't get any goodies that are keeping them in the running with what the spellcasters are doing as of this packet. All of their incredibly powerful abilities (like parry) got removed. Their damage got nerfed. Now, I am ok with all of that! I love the way the new fighter looks. In fact, up until I caught this imbalance, this packet was my favorite packet to date. But, this imbalance is horribly out of whack. 

I would be very very surprised if wizard cantrips are anything even remotely close to fighter basic damage. There might be points where wizard comes closer, but for most levels, fighter is going to be way ahead, surely.



No, not surely. The cantrips always deal very comparable damage to a sword and board fighter. Two weapon fighters and two-handed weapon fighters pull ahead. But a wizard will always be neck-in-neck with a sword-and-board fighter with its cantrips (in terms of damage). It will also be neck-in-neck with an archer's damage (though an archer has a bit more range). I am not ok with that. When it comes to cantrips, I feel that the martial characters must be a clear head and shoulders above what a wizard can do. Daily spells are where wizards should shine. 

Look, I am not saying I want wizard's nerfed into oblivion. I am not even sure that I have a problem with the daily spells. I got a little worried about the daily spells (because I need to make sure that a fighter using his heroic surge compares favorably to a wizard using a 6-9th level spell in terms of single target damage, but the truth is that even if the fighter is not comparing favorably that might be a problem with heroic surge being overnerfed in this last packet). The big problem that jumped out at me is that right now the cantrips are so good that even if the daily spells are just a little better (and I can tell by a glance they are far more than just a little better) then the wizard will pull ahead.

The cantrips are just WAY too good right now. They should be about half as effective as they are right now. Honestly, they should probably have their damage capped at 3 dice. Then they need to take careful stock of the new daily spells (to find out if they are overpowered or not. Maybe they are not). 
I wonder if we can get a math guy...where is lokair at? Have some one take the defualt stat array and run through all saves vs best attack stat the array gives...



Ha. That is rich. 


I dont think you can compare end game too closely. That part is gonna be way out of whack depending on who uses their burst skills, and you're also looking at utility balance and all the other goodies classes get. 

Compare levels 1-10 and see what you get for damage purposes. Then look at say 11-15. Then finally 16-20.



1) Spellcasters are clear winners when it comes to utility power. 

2) I flat out reject the notion that it is ok for the game to be imbalanced endgame.

3) Fighters don't get any goodies that are keeping them in the running with what the spellcasters are doing as of this packet. All of their incredibly powerful abilities (like parry) got removed. Their damage got nerfed. Now, I am ok with all of that! I love the way the new fighter looks. In fact, up until I caught this imbalance, this packet was my favorite packet to date. But, this imbalance is horribly out of whack. 

I would be very very surprised if wizard cantrips are anything even remotely close to fighter basic damage. There might be points where wizard comes closer, but for most levels, fighter is going to be way ahead, surely.



No, not surely. The cantrips always deal very comparabl damage to a sword and board fighter. Two weapon fighters and two-handed weapon fighters pull ahead. But a wizard will always be neck-in-neck with a sword-and-board fighter with its cantrips (in terms of damage). It will also be neck-in-neck with an archer's damage (though an archer has a bit more range). I am not ok with that. When it comes to cantrips, I feel that the martial characters must be a clear head and shoulders above what a wizard can do. Daily spells are where wizards should shine. 

Look, I am not saying I want wizard's nerfed into oblivion. I am not even sure that I have a problem with the daily spells. I got a little worried about the daily spells (because I need to make sure that a fighter using his heroic surge compares favorably to a wizard using a 6-9th level spell in terms of single target damage, but the truth is that even if the fighter is not comparing favorably that might be a problem with heroic surge being overnerfed in this last packet). The big problem that jumped out at me is that right now the cantrips are so good that even if the daily spells are just a little better (and I can tell by a glance they are far more than just a little better) then the wizard will pull ahead.

The cantrips are just WAY too good right now. They should be about half as effective as they are right now. Honestly, they should probably have their damage capped at 3 dice. Then they need to take careful stock of the new daily spells (to find out if they are overpowered or not. Maybe they are not). 



They should mirror the clerics weapon dice.

These new forums are terrible.

I misspell words on purpose too draw out grammer nazis.

I agree.


They should mirror the clerics weapon dice.


this
I hate that I'm going to say this, but the wizard should probably out damage the fighter in the long run; the fighter has better AC and HP. The "basic" game is going to be:

Fighter Protect the Wizard
Cleric keep the Fighter up
Rogue look for openings
Wizard nuke the enemies

I don't like this to this extent, but that's what the designers seem to be building towards.

There is a chance that the Fighter's expertise will catch up with the Wizard's spells, once that system matures; 6 specials per encounter is basically at-will, unless end game fights end up lasting quadruple what low-level fights last.

Poe's Law is alive and well.

A Cleric putting everything into combat should be a teeny bit ahead of the Fighter; the cleric has less hp. A Wizard putting everything into combat should be a bit better than that, as they have less HP and AC. Same with the Rogue.

But all of these classes will end up putting some of their combat into non-combat, while the fighter can't. Ideally speaking, the Fighter should be ahead, generally speaking, because of this.

Gods, this makes me want to play 4E again. 

Poe's Law is alive and well.

Hang on isnt ray of frost d8?

So fighter level 1 might be 2d12+3 say? Fighter clear winner. Even longsword fighter (who has all the benefits of a shield) is 2d8+3, still clear winner. This is without the +d6 expertise, or +6 hit chance.

At 5th, isnt fighter then 3d8+3 /2d12+3, and Ray of frost is 2d8? Fighter is still clear winner isnt he?

I dont have the docs in front of me.

Once you get into level 11+ land damage is not the only balancing factor and OK I dont know how that pans out at all. Yeah maybe Ray damage increase should slow down and drop a dice in the 11-20 range, i dunno.

And yes maximise - but that is limited to once/day.

Also - spells like Stink cloud are very situational. Most of the time you cant use it because your allies are also in it, or the monsters will just walk out of it and only take the damage once.
Hang on isnt ray of frost d8?

So fighter level 1 might be 2d12+3 say? Fighter clear winner. Even longsword fighter (who has all the benefits of a shield) is 2d8+3, still clear winner.

At 5th, isnt fighter then 3d8+3 /2d12+3, and Ray of frost is 2d8? Fighter is still clear winner isnt he?

I dont have the docs in front of me.

Once you get into level 11+ land damage is not the only balancing factor and OK I dont know how that pans out at all. Yeah maybe Ray damage increase should slow down and drop a dice in the 11-20 range, i dunno.



Fighter would start at 1d12 at level 1, and go up to 2d12 at level 5 (when they get deadly strike), all the way up to 5d12 at level 20.

At the end of the day, the fighter can get up to 5d12 + 5 + 2d6 (using combat surge + exp. dice + deadly strike) at level 20, just going off base weapon and strength, which they can do 4 times a day. Without combat surge, drop it by 1d6, and this they can do up to 6x per encounter.
If a wizard goes straight evoker, he should outdamage a fighter, but at a huge cost of versitility. It should be through his daily spells not his cantrips.

These new forums are terrible.

I misspell words on purpose too draw out grammer nazis.

2) I flat out reject the notion that it is ok for the game to be imbalanced endgame.

What?  Even if it exhibits a reciprocal imbalance at low level?

3) Fighters don't get any goodies that are keeping them in the running with what the spellcasters are doing as of this packet. All of their incredibly powerful abilities (like parry) got removed. Their damage got nerfed. Now, I am ok with all of that! I love the way the new fighter looks. In fact, up until I caught this imbalance, this packet was my favorite packet to date. But, this imbalance is horribly out of whack.

I've been pointing this out again lately, it's not something that's mattered the last 5 years, so it hadn't been on my mind until I ran a 5e playtest and started mucking about with 5e class design:

So, say 5e finally launches and a caster or two, maybe the Druid or Wizard, maybe something we haven't even seen yet, is maybe just arguably a tad imbalanced.  And, say it's a 5e-neo-Vancian caster who combines the best of 3.5 Sorcerer & Wizard.

As suplements come out, there will be the inevitable option bloat and power inflation.  Fighters will go from 20 feats to 200, Wizards from 300 spells to 3000, etc, etc.  Now, when a great (broken) new feat comes out all the fighter players will rush out and get it, and... wait to get a new feat, or retrain an old one, or just re-build a favorite fighter with the new feat instead of an old one.  They'll have a great new feat at the cost of whichever other feat they wanted least.  Nice for them.  OTOH, when a brand new super-cool (broken) wizard spell comes out, all the wizard players will rush out and get, and add it to their wizards' spellbooks ASAP.  The won't give up their least-favorite spell to get it, and they'll prep it and cast it as often as is optimal.  Lather, rinse repeat.  Eventually, the fighter builds are starting to look pretty 'tense' and 'samey:' every feat is a must-have, making room for a new one collapses the build.  The Wizards, OTOH, just have fatter and fatter spellbooks, and prep which ever spells seem like they'll be the most zaptastically optimal for the coming day.
And, of course, Clerics don't even go through the formality of adding a spell to a book, they just prep the latest best (most broken) spell after their next extended rest.

Now, that's nothing new.  In fact it's something old, and maybe it's a tribute to Next capturing that ol' D&D feel.  It's just something I hadn't had to think about in a, now that I think of it, surprisingly pleasant, last few years.

No, not surely. The cantrips always deal very comparable damage to a sword and board fighter. Two weapon fighters and two-handed weapon fighters pull ahead. But a wizard will always be neck-in-neck with a sword-and-board fighter with its cantrips (in terms of damage). It will also be neck-in-neck with an archer's damage (though an archer has a bit more range). I am not ok with that. When it comes to cantrips, I feel that the martial characters must be a clear head and shoulders above what a wizard can do. Daily spells are where wizards should shine.

Nod.  If they're going to balance at some point in a long enough day, fighter at-wills have to have some edge on caster at wills, just by the numbers, or they never catch up no matter how good the DM is at avoiding the 5MWD.  

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

I wonder if we can get a math guy...where is lokair at? Have some one take the defualt stat array and run through all saves vs best attack stat the array gives...



Ha. That is rich. 




I just put it in another thread, but part of the saving throw vs AC problem is the beastiary.

There is only 1 monster that has a +4 dex mod.  A lvl 12 rakshasa.
Then there are 4 with +3s, Lich, Wraith, Dread Wraith and Rust Monster.
There are actually quite a few negative modifiers as well.

At absolute worst... worst case possible, a wizard trying to hit the reflex save of a Rakshasa at lvl 1 with a 16 int, he has a 45% chance to land his spell.  
Worst case  for a level one fighter with a 16 str is that he is up against an 18 AC and hits  35% of the time.
The problem is that the middle range here sucks for the fighter.  Most creatures fall in the 13-16 AC range, whereas most monsters fall in the 0-2 range for dex mod.  Taking the average and saying that it is 14 for AC and +1 for dex mod, the fighter will always hit 15% less often than a wizard lands a reflex based spell at any level, and the fighter doesn't get to deal half damage on a miss.

In other news,
stinking cloud + circular wall
Stinking cloud + difficult terrain +slow effect from ray of frost
Stinking cloud + fighter using shove away + hold the line at the edge
Stinking cloud + thunderwaving creatures back in.  
Take another wizard and you can kill encounters with Stinking cloud + web
What a great spell =)