Mage to Melee damage scaling

[Asmodeus]

Maybe someone would like to discuss this / help me:

How is overall mage to melee damage output, when you compare D&D 5 with D&D 2, 3 or 3.5?

I have played my share of games using the other rulesets.

In 2E it usually was twilight of the gods when a high level mage started to do its thing.

3E had some strong melee builds but mages were still satisfying.

In 5E (i.e. Solasta) my mage does not perform.

I didn't take statistics of individual encounters (we can go down this route, but I would like to stay on a more general level).
My general feeling is that the groups paladin strongly outdamages the mage by a factor of 2 and the Rogue outdamages the mage by a factor of 1.5.
This has been going on the whole game over a wide level range.

So the question is:
Is this a design thing because a mage does bring more utility or is this me getting the skills wrong?

[Moffin Bovin]

Napoleon Wilson eredeti hozzászólása:

one of the many problems with 5e, is the creators despise casters except for bards. The concentration rule is one of the absolute worst features to institute. Melee and ranged scale so much faster than mage. The premier damage spell, fireball, averages 30=35 points of damage if they fail the save. FIghters and archers are doing 45-60 per arrow and get multiple attacks. 5E is an awful design and punishes spellcasters.

but a well placed fire ball will hit 6 to 8 enemies. that's somewhere in the realm of 150 to 200 damage. fighter ain't doing that at 5th level.

[Soteria]

Napoleon Wilson eredeti hozzászólása:

one of the many problems with 5e, is the creators despise casters except for bards. The concentration rule is one of the absolute worst features to institute. Melee and ranged scale so much faster than mage. The premier damage spell, fireball, averages 30=35 points of damage if they fail the save. FIghters and archers are doing 45-60 per arrow and get multiple attacks. 5E is an awful design and punishes spellcasters.

I don't think many level 5 fighters are doing 45-60 damage per attack. It sounds like you're comparing level 12 fighter damage with level 5 wizard damage. Fireball can be upcast and, as stated above, can hit multiple targets. Once you have at least 3 enemies casters can greatly exceed fighter damage.

[Friends with Benedicts]

Ok, now I want to do the experiment full caster party vs full martial party on a lot of games...

BG1, BG3, POE 2. SOLASTA, PATHFINDER .... Im really curious to the results now

[Frostfeather]

Friends with Benedicts eredeti hozzászólása:

Ok, now I want to do the experiment full caster party vs full martial party on a lot of games...

BG1, BG3, POE 2. SOLASTA, PATHFINDER .... Im really curious to the results now

I've run countless all-caster (usually all Wizard or Sorcerer) groups in all those games many times. Well BG3 only once.

But still... if you follow some basic guidelines, it's usually extremely effective. Like enemies can get bombarded and wrecked nearly instantly, but you do have to have ways of conserving spells in most games against weaker enemies.

Martial groups tend to require less micro. You can greatly reduce the micro in caster groups though, if you put in just a little effort.

[Friends with Benedicts]

Which was more entertaining to play in general?

[Frostfeather]

Friends with Benedicts eredeti hozzászólása:

Which was more entertaining to play in general?

Casters, which is why that's what I normally do. But it's definitely not everyone's cup of tea.

If you're new to using all caster groups, it's easier to start with a caster-heavy group instead. Like 1 Paladin (or Cleric) and 3-5 Sorcerers/Wizards or something similar. The Pally acts as a tank, carries physical damage in easier fights, and has some support/healing all on one character.

In real time games especially, an all caster group means you probably need at least one to act as a tank, which likely means building them differently than the others. And using their defensive spells as needed. It's extremely effective since arcane casters get strong defense spells, but does add another layer of complexity to the group. I'd recommend keeping the glass cannon backline mages similar or identical to keep things simple and manageable.

Most of those games have a caster option that's naturally tankier like Draconic Sorcerer or Undead Bloodline Sorcerer or Abjuration Wizard or whatever. I'll usually make the main character something like that and have them be pretty tanky yet still able to throw out spells, especially cone spells (Burning Hands, Cone of Cold, etc) and touch spells (Vampiric Touch, Fetid Caress, etc). It's a lot of fun using spells like that as a caster who is unafraid of being right up next to enemies. Meanwhile your teammates blast enemies quickly so fights don't drag on forever (your defensive spells are temporary, so you can't afford lengthy, drawn-out fights until you're higher level).

You also need a plan for magic resistant or immune enemies, but it's always possible to kill them with casters, often surprisingly easily.


I could give a lot of game-specific advice on the subject if you or anyone else is interested, too. It's kind of my thing and has been for as long as I can remember. I even played FF1 that way as a kid on the NES, lol.

[Asmodeus]

I now played the slavers custom modules with an all caster party and they really shone.
But those modules also have really a lot of low level enemies you can happily blast away.

In the Solasta main campaign which I finished just now, due to the limited number of enemies that are usually very scattered at the beginning of a fight, a hasted Paladin performs better and the Mages I found best for Counterspell, Haste and Banish.


Full caster party in BG1 is not fun due to their weak start. But you could (should) dual class: fighter up to 3, than mage. This is what I did in Icewind Dale with a party of three and it was a lot of fun. (Smaller party levels faster).

[Frostfeather]

Asmodeus eredeti hozzászólása:

Full caster party in BG1 is not fun due to their weak start. But you could (should) dual class: fighter up to 3, than mage. This is what I did in Icewind Dale with a party of three and it was a lot of fun. (Smaller party levels faster).

Actually I've found BG1 to be one of the best games for a full caster group. There are almost no magic resistant enemies, Sleep is crazy op, the game throws wands/consumables at you like candy, Web is *bonkers*, and throwing daggers with 18 Strength are really op as well. There are many ways to make it so your attacks cannot miss, making crap THAC0 a non-issue.

If you go with, say, 1 Cleric and 5 Sorcerers then you've also got Command, which is also really op. And probably an even easier time tanking early on, though a Dragon Disciple mc is my personal favorite for a tank. You can grab the Ring of Wizardry right off the bat and use Larloch's Minor Drain to "heal" yourself.

Lately, I've been using Xan as my main tank just to mix things up though.

[Friends with Benedicts]

Just to reply to you guys all at once my full caster ideia definitely does not allow for paladin. He'd be in the martial category in my handicap.

It'd be something like warlocks, bards, druids, wizards sorcerer's and clerics (which may be op and I may remove them).

The "melee" team would be pala (again op) barb, fighter, rogue, ranger and monk

This is just the base idea, some of the game's mentioned like pillars do not have sorcerer for example, instead having the cypher which could be either melee or a caster group, but then I'd guess I just avoid them entirely

[Friends with Benedicts]

And to add, a game like pillars of eternity would greatly be hindered without a caster which begs me curiosity how they will deal with all the de buffs without a priest or druid to counter these debuffs

[Frostfeather]

Friends with Benedicts eredeti hozzászólása:

And to add, a game like pillars of eternity would greatly be hindered without a caster which begs me curiosity how they will deal with all the de buffs without a priest or druid to counter these debuffs

A no caster Pillars 1 group isn't bad at all. A Paladin can Liberating Exhortation debuffs as needed. You've got "expendable" Ranger pets, figurine summons, and more to take some hits if you need to. And all kinds of scrolls, consumables, and talents to address your weaknesses.

I did a Paladin, Chanter, and 4 Rangers once and it was very effective. The Chanter didn't even use Invocations or Dragon Thrashed, they were just there to auto-buff the Rangers by being near them.

[Asmodeus]

night4 eredeti hozzászólása:

Actually I've found BG1 to be one of the best games for a full caster group. ...

Coming from Realms of Arkania and Daggerfall, Baldurs Gate was my first game using D&D rules. I wanted to roll with a Mage as main and after several hours of play I was burned out and gave the game away as a gift to a friend.

I finished BG1&2 some years later, but I would still say, to play Baldurs gate as mage you need serious D&D and BG1 meta game knowledge. Meaning: If you know where to go, in what trees to look, how to cheese encounters etc. mage is feasible.
But going in blind as a mage is kind of a death wish. 6HP against 1D6 Bandit with sword. Have fun - not.

[Frostfeather]

Asmodeus eredeti hozzászólása:

night4 eredeti hozzászólása:

Actually I've found BG1 to be one of the best games for a full caster group. ...

Coming from Realms of Arkania and Daggerfall, Baldurs Gate was my first game using D&D rules. I wanted to roll with a Mage as main and after several hours of play I was burned out and gave the game away as a gift to a friend.

I finished BG1&2 some years later, but I would still say, to play Baldurs gate as mage you need serious D&D and BG1 meta game knowledge. Meaning: If you know where to go, in what trees to look, how to cheese encounters etc. mage is feasible.
But going in blind as a mage is kind of a death wish. 6HP against 1D6 Bandit with sword. Have fun - not.

Metaknowledge does allow you to breeze through it, but even my earliest all caster groups in BG1 back in like 1999 weren't that difficult. Early on, it's largely due to the craziness of Sleep and the fact that you're not fighting hordes of undead enemies immune to it like in IWD1. (You can figure, even without any D&D knowledge whatsoever, that your caster group will need something to use against groups of enemies and Sleep is one of the few level 1 options). And the fact that you can Magic Missile spam just about any difficult enemy to death from level 3 on.

BG1 has also always had this odd mechanic where low level characters survive what should be fatal hits with 1 hp. I've never fully understood exactly how it works, but it does make playing a level 1 Mage rather forgiving.

[Baked.Bread]

Did over 500 damage with a Steel Wind Strike yesterday. Was giggling n pooping myself so bad I forgot to screenshot.

[Asmodeus]

night4 eredeti hozzászólása:

... craziness of Sleep ... You can figure, even without any D&D knowledge whatsoever, that your caster group will need something to use against groups of enemies ...

Why "sleep" if you can "kill"? So back in the day "Burning hands" and "Spraying colors" sounded much better. Remember this was a time when you couldn't quickly check the internet for the latest cheese or power build. So I never knew.