|
8 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 8:51PM
#31
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2012
|
Someone should do a survivability comparison.
too easy.
Fighter: plate armor and high hp = a lot of survivability
Wizard: no armor and low to extremely low hp = low survivability
The only mitigating factor I can think of is how much the wizard hides and gets protected by the other players, he stands in the open... he dead. He get's unlucky... he dead. He takes a risk... he dead.
I get the whole "quadratic power" and "god-like" abilites stuff at higher levels, but I think we may need to rethink some of that so the first couple levels of wizard aren't filled with so much more danger than the other classes. You should be an equal contribitor to the party, not invalid half the time and uber-god the other half. Of course, that's partially why I prefer the sorcerer
Sorry, "unconcious and unble to particiapate until healed" should replace "dead". Which is slightly better but still annoying
Actually with Shield and Mirror Image the Wizard is about equal to a fighter in the defense category if not better and seeing as they can do this nearly every encounter (assuming 4 encounters in a day like the play test packet suggests) at 5th level its possible for a Wizard to out 'defense' a fighter, but only if they use 90% of their spell slots on defense...
what's that? a wizard can show versatility and cover different grounds? forbid the thought
Versatility is one thing, outdoing other classes is unacceptable. 
I don't think I woujld call a wizard who uses 90% of his spells to get the AC of a fighter 'outdoing' the fighter.
Unless you are going to argue that those remaining 10% are enough to make him as useful to the party as the fighter.*
Besides - a Dragpn Sorcerer does that much better than a wizard. He can out defense the fighter starting at L1. By L3 nothing in the Bestiary can hit him on less than a 20.
Carl
*Although in AD&D1st I did used to have a wizard who took almost exclusively defensive spells. But he had an excuse: He was -6 to his hp (with no ConBonus - due to the death of a familar) - he didn't have more than 1 hp till third level.
That depends, if they have the Necromancer specialty and run out and distract all the monsters and attack with shocking grasp then yeah, they are still doing a pretty good job of being as effective or more effective than a sword and board fighter... In fact with the servant at 3rd level they are probably better than a sword and board fighter...
also remember, a wizards spells expire, a fighters gear is forever
Forever - unless they run into a Grey Ooze or a Rust Monster.
Carl
outliers should never be used when making a comparitive assumption
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 26, 2012 - 5:24AM
#32
|
|
|
Someone should do a survivability comparison.
too easy.
Fighter: plate armor and high hp = a lot of survivability
Wizard: no armor and low to extremely low hp = low survivability
The only mitigating factor I can think of is how much the wizard hides and gets protected by the other players, he stands in the open... he dead. He get's unlucky... he dead. He takes a risk... he dead.
I get the whole "quadratic power" and "god-like" abilites stuff at higher levels, but I think we may need to rethink some of that so the first couple levels of wizard aren't filled with so much more danger than the other classes. You should be an equal contribitor to the party, not invalid half the time and uber-god the other half. Of course, that's partially why I prefer the sorcerer
Sorry, "unconcious and unble to particiapate until healed" should replace "dead". Which is slightly better but still annoying
Actually with Shield and Mirror Image the Wizard is about equal to a fighter in the defense category if not better and seeing as they can do this nearly every encounter (assuming 4 encounters in a day like the play test packet suggests) at 5th level its possible for a Wizard to out 'defense' a fighter, but only if they use 90% of their spell slots on defense...
what's that? a wizard can show versatility and cover different grounds? forbid the thought
Versatility is one thing, outdoing other classes is unacceptable.
I don't think I woujld call a wizard who uses 90% of his spells to get the AC of a fighter 'outdoing' the fighter.
Unless you are going to argue that those remaining 10% are enough to make him as useful to the party as the fighter.*
Besides - a Dragpn Sorcerer does that much better than a wizard. He can out defense the fighter starting at L1. By L3 nothing in the Bestiary can hit him on less than a 20.
Carl
*Although in AD&D1st I did used to have a wizard who took almost exclusively defensive spells. But he had an excuse: He was -6 to his hp (with no ConBonus - due to the death of a familar) - he didn't have more than 1 hp till third level.
That depends, if they have the Necromancer specialty and run out and distract all the monsters and attack with shocking grasp then yeah, they are still doing a pretty good job of being as effective or more effective than a sword and board fighter... In fact with the servant at 3rd level they are probably better than a sword and board fighter...
also remember, a wizards spells expire, a fighters gear is forever
Encounters last around 4-5 rounds and there are 4 encounters per day on average. A 5th level Wizard can cast each of those spells every encounter if they memorize Mirror Image in a 3rd level slot. Not to mention they last 10 round each so its possible to get 2 encounters in each spell if they rush to the next encounter...
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 26, 2012 - 11:55AM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Feb 18, 2010
|
Someone should do a survivability comparison.
too easy.
Fighter: plate armor and high hp = a lot of survivability
Wizard: no armor and low to extremely low hp = low survivability
The only mitigating factor I can think of is how much the wizard hides and gets protected by the other players, he stands in the open... he dead. He get's unlucky... he dead. He takes a risk... he dead.
I get the whole "quadratic power" and "god-like" abilites stuff at higher levels, but I think we may need to rethink some of that so the first couple levels of wizard aren't filled with so much more danger than the other classes. You should be an equal contribitor to the party, not invalid half the time and uber-god the other half. Of course, that's partially why I prefer the sorcerer
Sorry, "unconcious and unble to particiapate until healed" should replace "dead". Which is slightly better but still annoying
Actually with Shield and Mirror Image the Wizard is about equal to a fighter in the defense category if not better and seeing as they can do this nearly every encounter (assuming 4 encounters in a day like the play test packet suggests) at 5th level its possible for a Wizard to out 'defense' a fighter, but only if they use 90% of their spell slots on defense...
what's that? a wizard can show versatility and cover different grounds? forbid the thought
Versatility is one thing, outdoing other classes is unacceptable.
I don't think I woujld call a wizard who uses 90% of his spells to get the AC of a fighter 'outdoing' the fighter.
Unless you are going to argue that those remaining 10% are enough to make him as useful to the party as the fighter.*
Besides - a Dragpn Sorcerer does that much better than a wizard. He can out defense the fighter starting at L1. By L3 nothing in the Bestiary can hit him on less than a 20.
Carl
*Although in AD&D1st I did used to have a wizard who took almost exclusively defensive spells. But he had an excuse: He was -6 to his hp (with no ConBonus - due to the death of a familar) - he didn't have more than 1 hp till third level.
That depends, if they have the Necromancer specialty and run out and distract all the monsters and attack with shocking grasp then yeah, they are still doing a pretty good job of being as effective or more effective than a sword and board fighter... In fact with the servant at 3rd level they are probably better than a sword and board fighter...
also remember, a wizards spells expire, a fighters gear is forever
Encounters last around 4-5 rounds and there are 4 encounters per day on average. A 5th level Wizard can cast each of those spells every encounter if they memorize Mirror Image in a 3rd level slot. Not to mention they last 10 round each so its possible to get 2 encounters in each spell if they rush to the next encounter...
If you there is less than 60 seconds between 2 encounters, then they basically just 1 long encounter.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 26, 2012 - 4:08PM
#34
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
The only mitigating factor I can think of is how much the wizard hides and gets protected by the other players, he stands in the open... he dead. He get's unlucky... he dead. He takes a risk... he dead.
So does anyone think they seriously wont get the usual compensating spells that make hiding.(invisibility anyone) and staying out of reach (flight and blink) and buffing yourself(mage armor and shapechange into something big) ?
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 26, 2012 - 10:36PM
#35
|
Date Joined:
Oct 16, 2008
|
The only mitigating factor I can think of is how much the wizard hides and gets protected by the other players, he stands in the open... he dead. He get's unlucky... he dead. He takes a risk... he dead.
So does anyone think they seriously wont get the usual compensating spells that make hiding.(invisibility anyone) and staying out of reach (flight and blink) and buffing yourself(mage armor and shapechange into something big) ?
They probably will, but I was mainly talking about the first three levels or so. Wizard survivablity jumps as he gains access to "defensive" spells, but until then, or if he isn't willing to devote the majority of his slots to those spells, he has very low survivability unless the other players actively defend him. This is opinion of course, but it's backed up by some pretty compelling numbers.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 27, 2012 - 6:41AM
#36
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
The only mitigating factor I can think of is how much the wizard hides and gets protected by the other players, he stands in the open... he dead. He get's unlucky... he dead. He takes a risk... he dead.
So does anyone think they seriously wont get the usual compensating spells that make hiding.(invisibility anyone) and staying out of reach (flight and blink) and buffing yourself(mage armor and shapechange into something big) ?
They probably will, but I was mainly talking about the first three levels or so. Wizard survivablity jumps as he gains access to "defensive" spells, but until then, or if he isn't willing to devote the majority of his slots to those spells, he has very low survivability unless the other players actively defend him. This is opinion of course, but it's backed up by some pretty compelling numbers.
I thoroughly detest the low survivability of all the classes at low level but I also consider it in flux... the fighter actually has higher survivability than hit points indicate (use of parry at minimum). Low hit points make the survivor option way too useful, in effect I want to pull the if a feat is that good give it to everyone trick and say all the heros are tough/lucky/blessed or insert flavor here and have that benefit.
I think the best idea I have seen for arcane casters was allowing a cantrip form of shield that can be spent or which collapses after blocking certain number of hit points. Then the casters general offense or whatever can be delaid by the need to recover/bolster his deffences.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 27, 2012 - 12:13PM
#37
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
Yea, Lokiare's suggestion that the shield spell be turned into a cantrip that gifts 1d6 temporary hit points is one of the best suggestions I have seen to date. I REALLY hope they implement it. Which is weird, because I don't usually value his input...
But, I do have to say, I also believe that they seem to be putting some real effort into keeping the game breaking spells out of this edition. And, I think that continual efforts to judge the wizard's overall power based on spells that do not exist yet is counterproductive to playtesting. Long story short, right now, when comparing survivability, the fighter is leaps and bounds ahead of the wizard. He receives at least 6 more hit points at level 1. He will receive an average of at least 3 less hit points per level. He will be hit far more often than the fighter (when monsters attack him, which will logically be any time he makes a big show of himself by going nova). I think that is a pretty fair balance against the wizard’s versatility, especially since the current fighter is always more effective at single target damage over the course of 16-20 rounds, and can compare favorably (while still being slightly inferior) to the overall damage dealt by a wizard with a spell list that favors AoE blast mechanics.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 27, 2012 - 3:47PM
#38
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
Yea, Lokiare's suggestion that the shield spell be turned into a cantrip that gifts 1d6 temporary hit points is one of the best suggestions I have seen to date. I REALLY hope they implement it. Which is weird, because I don't usually value his input...
He can be highly variable at times (but he does have a creative bent under the hood). Like many of us here actually.
But, I do have to say, I also believe that they seem to be putting some real effort into keeping the game breaking spells out of this edition. And, I think that continual efforts to judge the wizard's overall power based on spells that do not exist yet is counterproductive to playtesting.
Hey I am in favor of narrowing that defensive gap in magical ways that sacrefice some action economy (isnt that kind of he concept of the shield cantrip. The premise of the caster being differently defended is kind of core - the effects that do it need a balance factor true.
In 1e a combination of spells and items could make a mu better defended than the fighter as they got towards higher levels. We can call that broken or just another I start bad and get progressively better effects (the middle of the road effect defended differently not necessarily worse).
|
|
|
