Just keep in mind that someone who agrees with you may not reach out to say "all the rankings were dead on!" - they might just be leaving a Like and moving on. You're naturally going to hear more from people who disagree :)
On the other hand, if an influential youtuber is misleading players - by oh, say, ranking Battlemaster Fighter the same as Arcane Archer (ahem, cough cough) - then that influential youtuber needs to be called out on it. And this is okay. Treantmonk may be "technically right" ranking BM fighter "C", given how he sets up his ranking system - but in the real world, where all sorts of people either rush through this and don't fully grasp his ranking system - or they just don't get it - they see "C" and think BM fighter isn't very good. And that is a problem, because it is wrong and, again, misleading. Dungeon Dudes, also Canadian (for what that matters), ranked BM fighter A or S - I think I recall them saying maybe BM needs an S. Can't recall which they settled on. Treantmonk got raked over the coals for his BM ranking - and it needed to happen - it was a mistake. It misleads a lot of people. Treantmonk is great on spellcasters. Not so great at ranking non-caster classes. I am still going to watch his videos and leave likes, even if I disagree from time to time. His virtues far outweigh his few flaws (and I have flaws, too, we all do). I noticed in this one he said "anyway" instead of "anyways". Wow. Now THAT is a big deal .... (I am joking).
@@johneubank8543 Ooh, right, I forgot about the Battlemaster rating. Completely slipped my mind. Yeah, that was a spicy take. Also kinda funny, since the Battle Master is the closest thing in D&D to a "Martial Caster", even more than the Arcane Archer.
@@johneubank8543 Dungeon Dudes went straight to S for the Battle Master, it being their top fighter by far. And yeah ranking BM equal to Arcane Archer is incorrect. They added Echo and Rune Knight to S later. TMs low ranking for vengeance paladin was also questionable imho.
That’s a good point. We do “command climate surveys“ in the army. They make everyone do it, otherwise people will only do the survey if they have a problem or complaint, and you don’t get an accurate reflection of the environment.
One thing I think almost every reviewer I’ve seen on UA-cam seems to forget about the Order of Scribes wizard is the fact that, if they lose their spell book, it only takes them a short rest to COMPLETELY reconstruct it with ALL the spells it contains within it at no cost. Think about that for a minute. If any other wizard has their spell book lost or destroyed they can only transcribe those spells that they have Currently prepared and at a time and cost of one hour and 10 gold pieces per spell level for each spell copied into the new book. Any other spells that were in their spell book have to be replaced through the normal method of finding spells or leveling up. This is why other wizards have to keep backup copies of their spell books around, and those books still cost them 10 gold pieces per spell level per spell in the book to make. This may not seem groundbreaking, but in a campaign where your wizard loses their spell book it can be devastating. For an Order of Scribes wizard it’s no big deal whatsoever. That is an incredible benefit in my opinion.
While true, I can't imagine it's very common for a DM to actually have a wizard lose their spellbook without buy-in from that player. I'm sure those campaigns exist but I'd be willing to bet it's probably not the norm.
Purely flavor wise, Scribes Wizard has got to be my favorite in the game. Nothing else really captures that master of knowledge vibe as well as the wizard most adept at recording every single spell they come across in record time. That and the idea of just having your manifested mind float in and summon a demon in a room while you're off somewhere else out of sight just chilling is too fun for me. Even if the manifested mind vanishes, the spell doesn't stop.
Agree. Especially in a middle/low magic campaign, the "greatest wizard in the world" being a Scribes Wizard that knows nearly everything, and has blazed the trail for higher level spellcasting gives off some hmsuper cool vibes.
@@37thgungrunts mechanical power aside, turning a fireball into a ball of mechanical fragments (for piercing damage) or just a wrecking ball, for bludgeoning, is both an immensely cool visual while also just makes you feel like a true master of magic. Like you go beyond merely what's there and can fundamentally alter spells just from your depth of knowledge alone.
@@37thgungrunts I enjoyed it. I played one for three or four sessions. It drove the DM crazy because I kept running one way and using the manifest mind to cast spells from alternate directions. I didn't even get to the point of using him for what I thought he'd be really good at, stealing spells from unwary wizards.
People have a strong tendency to overestimate classes they've played, because just about all of the classes/subclasses can 'feel' powerful in different moments. Most people simply don't consider that the S and A tier subclasses are incredibly, constantly powerful when optimized. There is a big 'feel' difference between a battle master fighter who gets to use manuevers and make 4+ attacks in a single turn from level 5 and outright kill many creatures, and a twilight cleric that just kinda stands next to as many people as they can. But of course, the twilight cleric is vastly more mechanically powerful. Reminds me of your god wizard origin story a bit, seems to just be how the average dnd player views power in the game is a bit skewed
Its funny because i’m in the opposite boat. I play a hexblade and love that character. I also play an eldritch knight that i really like in another campaign. Granted, i play full hexblade, but whenever i hear others talking about it i get the impression that it’s one of the most overrated subclasses ever. And my friend was trying to argue that eldritch knights are super strong and deserve like B or A tier. Meanwhile i play basically an amped eldritch knight(my spells aren’t limited to evocation and abjuration, i can get any wizard spells of any school when i get a new spell) and i think C tier makes perfect sense, maybe higher end, but honestly that difference is compensated for by the lack of a spell limitation.
@@fabian268 Sounds like you've got a head on your shoulders then, most people certainly overrate eldritch knight in particular since they're great fun to play but even with an expanded spell list simply can't keep up on either front. They aren't as good frontliners/fighters as a battle master would be, and they certainly aren't as good spellcasters as a primary caster would be. It's an odd in between that leads to unique gameplay and occasionally being surprised at creative low level spell use, but not exactly the 'best fighter subclass' many seem to see it as. Hex blade is only truly powerful as a dip, afterwards it suffers from the typical issues with the warlocks' chassis of not enough slots and not enough versatility with those slots. May also be that many people play it in early levels when it's actually very good, so they simply believe it's powerful throughout.
The Ring of Spell Storing is known as one of the most powerful magical items in the game, so much so that a dm has to very careful how they appear in their games, but chronurgy is just like: here you go!
Honestly, I wish they would just do a Sage Advice to nerf all the Familiar shenanigans. Just a simple: "Familiars and other magically summoned creatures cannot cast spells nor use spells cast upon them."
@@agilemind6241 Remembering the Goodberry/Life Cleric exploit, I worry Crawford would just respond with "yeah, sure, go ahead, familiars cast ALL the spells they want".
@@agilemind6241 Why do we have to get some authority figure involved when the lot of them couldn't make an even vaguely balanced game to begin with? If you DM, and shutting down some folk's favorite part of familiars is your bag, then you go ahead and render the lot of them as emotional support pets. That's your game. Better yet, be rid of them entirely. The more options people have, the more than can circumvent your preferred version of fun, and if they're allowed to have their own fun, then that's not your favorite and you should tell on them.
I'm sort of surprised you didn't touch on the unique spells of the chronurgy/graviturgy wizards. No other wizard gets them RAW, so in a sense, they're subclass features. Gift of alacrity stands out to me since it combos with the chronurgist's initiative bonus to take it from probably going first, to almost certainly going first. Graviturgy also gets the best first level area blast spell in the game IMO.
I mean, can't any other wizard copy them from a spellbook or scroll? Granted, there does still need to be a first source of them. Those scrolls, or other homebrew spells that work in a similar manner, might also be good sidequest loot for a wizard.
Fortunes favor is also shockingly powerful at high levels when gold is no longer an issue in most campaigns. I know this is beyond the scope of this video, but selecting fortunes favor as your spell mastery and bringing around 2,000+ gold worth of pearls all the time means constant luck active for your whole party. And I find it quite fitting for a time Wizard to be manipulating time to give his party members better odds of succeeding important saving throws.
@@aprinnyonbreak1290 officially no, i believe they aren't on the wizard class spell list. The Wildemount book has some suggestions for adding it to spell list for other classes. The wizard is certainly the most natural, but it isn't written into the rules.
I just imagine spell preparation for wizard as someone with terrible memory or scattered thoughts taking their huge book and using a limited number of tabs to bookmark what they need for the day.
I think of Preperations as Cramming for a Test in which you convince the Universe to do something it normally wouldn't. The Test is Pass/Fail, in Short Essay Form. And, while you are taking it, some wyverns are trying to jab you with their poisoned stingers. Also, your friends might die if you mess up.
I think it reflects the intellectual approach to magic very well, the wizard always has the gist of their spells in mind but in order to actually cast it they need to remind themselves of the specifics of it, the formula, incantations, or whatevs.
In the old systems, spell slots were basically pre-filled by preparing spells, in an attempt to model Vancian Magic where every spell is its own living entity that would leave your mind once you've cast it. Fifth Edition simplifies its rules to where that model doesn't work anymore, but it doesn't really offer a way to interpret spell-preparation that *does* work for the wizard.
I think another thing throwing off rankings between people is that your scale is more gorgiving to begin with. Your 'C' is 'perfectly fine' and your 'D' is 'can be fine with a bit of work'. A lot of oeople's ranking/ratings/what have you are more in line with (and likely influenced by) the US education system, where 'A'/4.0/100%/top rank is the expected result, and every point or tier from which you deviate from that is a measure of how increasingly you've failed to measure up to par.
I found your introduction about ranking and the real take away is about people not about subclasses to be very interesting. That rings very true for me as well. In every video you say, "D&D is for everyone." I think it's an important phrase - and it's more complex than it sounds. Every table is different. Every DM and player - different in their approach to the game, to storytelling, to mechanics, to rules, even to what they want from the game. Every single person who plays is looking for their own good time. That's why it's so hard to find a group and when you do, so hard to leave a good one. It works for your experience. All that being said, I LOVE your analysis videos. I love your rankings and the way you look at spells and abilities in terms of versatility and effectiveness across levels. When I'm picking spells, I always come and listen to your discussions of them to consider what I'm taking and why. Your analysis is statistic, data, and mechanic based - also based on your own experiences and the table where you roll the dice. Not everyone has had that experience or, to be fair, wants it. The real truth is, it doesn't matter how "S" Moon Druid is - I have zero interest in druids. I've never played one and I don't expect that I will. My ranking would be ridiculously different from yours - and it would be based on different criteria. I respect your analysis for what it is - solid examination of mechanics and a values based ranking of those mechanics. It helps that I also value those and I find myself nodding way more often than disagreeing with your explanations. In fact, I don't think that I've ever disagreed with your analysis (except for the warlock invocations ranking one - and that is completely based on my experience and my ability to utilize/abuse an invocation at my table.) I recommend your channel to anyone who is looking to build a character and wants to know what works best / effectively, optimally. I don't think I would recommend your channel to someone who was asking, "What's the best set of spells for creating dramatic stage effects - combat isn't really a consideration?" Your ability to critically and analytically break down a feature into its mechanic parts and academically examine utility and efficacy, is brilliant. Period. You are really freaking good at what you do. It's just that not everyone plays like you do. So your analysis doesn't sit with them - they need a different analysis because they have their own values. Subjective. Opinion. Exactly as the disclaimer said from day 1. So I guess the point here is: You're awesome. I love what you're doing and how you're helping me think about what I'm doing at the table. Please keep it up. Also, more is better and if I ever can, I will support. Don't worry that you're not everyone's exact cup of tea. Some people don't even like tea.
23:30 I beg to differ on the 2 lvl dip into wizard. When combined with a half caster like artificer, eldritch knight, or arcane trickster, the synergy is quite good. And with ritual casting and arcane recovery, this really adds to your spellcasting to these lesser spellcasting classes.
Plus the ability to magpie spells off of scrolls or defeated wizards is also pretty good, especially when a lot of other caster's main drawbacks is a limited number of spells known.
A 2 level dip can be quite effective on those, though if there's a chance of getting to level 20 there's no chance I'm multiclassing out of Artificer, as their capstone is too much fun. And I actually prefer swapping out of Eldritch Knight to straight Wizard after 7 levels for more spells, typically into War Wizard or Chronurgy/Divination. I do very much like a short dip on Arcane Trickster, though.
One thing you didn't mention in Chronomancer & Graviturgist is that in a campaign that allows them at all, they are the only subclasses that can learn Dunamancy spells without special dispensation from your DM. And there are some strong spells in there other wizards cannot normally learn.
There are ways to learn Dunamancy outside those two subclasses, when you encounter the phrase "from any spell list". For example, Death Clerics get a free Necromancy Cantrip, and Sapping Sting is an option.
@@MyRegularNameWasTaken Or pact of the tome warlock, or bard through magical secrets, maybe geine warlock through limited wish might be able to replicate them or anyone with wish could also.
Of course things can vary at individual tables. But it doesn't seem Treantmonk normally takes house rules into account for rankings, though he does sometimes mention common ones. And as it is written, only these 2 subclasses would typically be able to pick them up by default. Though the DM can of course allow it if he wishes. So I still think the point stands that this does affect the power level of these 2 subclasses, as written.
For Chronurgy I would definitely change it to you can only store a spell in the bead that has a casting time of one action. And for the familiar, I would say that moving it to another dimension would break concentration. I feel like concentrating on a spell affecting a different dimension should not be easy.
Am I the only person who misses the Spellcraft skill? I feel like scenarios like this are exactly what the Spellcraft skill should exist for. "You're holding your magical focus in another dimension, buster, that's at least a DC 20 check" But, anyways.
I'd modify it so that the casting time coming out of the bead is the standard casting time; if the spell would normally take an hour, it still takes an hour. As for specific spells that still break it, like Find Familiar, I'd probably let clever players do so once, then put it on a ban list of spells that can't go in the bead. Just like I don't let players play as Aarokocra, I have no problem saying, "Sorry, that is way more powerful than I am ready to balance around. Congratulations, you have made something too good." I say it with sincerity, but also with clarity.
@@danielbernhardt1327 Yeah. Back in the day, it was involved in things like counterspells and certain specific spell interactions, that have mostly been simplified or else baked into specific spells these days. But, ironically, I feel like Concentration adds more reason than ever for there to be a skill involved in maintaining it through various weird conditions besides standard breakage. Like maintaining concentration on an effect that is in a different dimension than you.
My favorite primary class to dip into wizard is rogue. Arcane trickster plus bladsinger is really nice. Eventually the goal would be bladesinger 6 arcane trickster x.
I really appreciated the perspicacious intro. Rankings that roughly follow a centered bell curve DO make much more sense and are much more useful than those that would put the vast majority of options into B-tier or higher. However, I do believe that some degree of an upward trend is warranted. Deviating from a perfect bell curve with a B-tier more populated than D and an A much larger than E, to an even greater extent than you have currently, is something I see as a commendation of a well designed and balanced game. I'm not going to claim that 5e is perfect, but I do think it would be more honest to how well designed it is in general if your chart were shifted *slightly* closer to the extremely inaccurate one you showed at the beginning. I don't think very many things should move, nor should they move very far. But my first choices for doing so remain Battle Masters, Arcane Tricksters, and Artificers as a whole. Still, I agree with the overwhelming majority of what you determined. We all really appreciate the exercise and recognize how much work went into it.
Battle Master should definitely be ranked higher, Chris' argument for why it was in the C-tier was that it was supposedly hard to optimize and easy to screw up - which I don't agree with at all, at least not compared to most full spellcasters. If in doubt, simply put your highest score into DEX, get Crossbow Expert and Sharpshooter and use all of your combat superiority dice on sharpshooter precision attacks. Voilà, you just made a highly effective character without even really diving into other maneuver options. You can't really do that with any of the higher ranked full spellcasters.
The premise of a bell curve being the ideal spread is kinda undone by giving each rank a basic meaning. If you say things like this rank is difficult to make good but can work in the right circumstances, this rank is for th broken classes, etc... then that's already allowing for any kind of spread.
Also, I don't think that putting a lot in B tier or higher makes much sense. There just aren't that many good or great subclasses. I would rank a lot of classes even lower than he does. My bar for "acceptable" is clearly higher.
Honestly, I have agreed with the vast majority of your rankings. Of course there where exceptions once in a while, but in all honesty, at least from an objective mechanical point of view I feel that you are pretty spot on for the most part.
I think my biggest disagreement is the Paladin, mostly just from a grading philosophy standpoint, rather than how they were graded. I think that differences between subclasses should be magnified a bit, so that something like the Paladin, where "this is awful, but hey, it's still a Paladin, C tier" doesn't happen. That and Wild Magic Sorcerer. It's fun, but, I feel, is quite possibly the only subclass in the game that actually makes the base class worse, since the wild casting table feature subtly discourages noncombat casting, especially during intense social gameplay, where accidentally farting a magic missile into King Steve's face will end the campaign then and there. It also asks a lot of the GM. It's way worse. But otherwise, yeah, mostly agrees.
@@aprinnyonbreak1290 Is Wild Magic Sorcerer really the only one that makes the base class worse? Looking at you, Berzerker - although I suppose you don't HAVE to frenzy, so it is just a non feature at best.
@@aprinnyonbreak1290 In general, paladins just have really minor subclass features, so two paladins vary little in strength regardless of subclass. And when you're ranking every subclass in the game against each other, that small difference in overall character power results in a small range in rankings.
@@RandomToon1 Exactly. The Berserker feature is an option. A bad one, but there's nothing stopping you from just playing your Berserker as a subclassless Barbarian 99, or even 100% of the time. It's also not the same as "bad build" subclasses, like the Storm Sorcerer, which is only worse than a sub classless Sorcerer if you let the subclass determine the spells you pick. Wild Magic is a different beast. It's unlikely, but always possible to be forced to roll on the Wild Magic table off of the casting of any levelled spell, which means it's something you need to consider whenever you want to cast the spell, but a wild magic result could prove absolutely catastrophic, which as a whole starts to discourage sensitive and nonessential spellcasting altogether, and you can't bypass this just by ignoring subclass features like you can with the Berserker. And that goes double or triple if you actually have used the feature that lets the DM decide when a roll happens, depending on the DM you have. It brings to mind that old argument for natural 1's always autofailing, and natural 20's always autosucceeding. If your car has a 90% chance of working normally, a 5% chance of teleporting you to work instantly, and a 5% chance of exploding the moment you insert the key, most people would stop using their car. It's less than 5% for the WM Sorcerer, but still enough exploding cars to discourage using your car for anything besides your most essential travel requirements. And, of course, a feature that has, more or less baked into it, a "once per round, as a free action, bug the DM about this" feature is also sometimes mysteriously tied to unfortunate accidents befalling the character.
Just wanted to stop by and say I appriciate this series, even if I disagree with some of your rankings. You do a good enough job of explaining the why of the rankings that I'm able to interpolate them and figure out the ranking in my own games (e.g. my group usually has 2 combat encounters per day, with a reliable short rest between them). I'm looking forward to using the completed list if I even become a DM to either steer my players away from the F and S tiers, or to work with them to make adjustments that feel fun and reasonable.
I agree most of the F tiers are bad, and even quite a bit of the B, C, D and E tiers, I don't think most of the S tiers are overpowered, but just need a watchful DM or somewhat restrained player so they are not abused.
Should also say that when I was playing my order of scribes wizard. "Silence" was one of my favorite ritual spells to cast, with its level 2 feature. If we were in combat facung spellcasters or trying to be discreet, or doing infiltration, it was great to basically be able to cast silence instantly without using a spell slot. Also worked amazingly well since we didn't have a rogue in the party and this allowed my PC to use "knock without alerting anyone, so I could open a door quickly while saving on spell slots when we needed to be quick.
I'm pleased to see where wizard lands so far. It's not a broken class, and the subclasses are all basically good. In the next video, among the PHB subclasses, I expect a wider variance. D&D is a game of doing, all spells have greater effect than a high save or AC.
You got my like and subscribe in the intro. Most of my comments tend to be nitpick critiques on how harshly some classes get put down in your ratings, but you nailed it that we as a community and often individuals typically fail to see the full picture, myself included. 👏👏👍👍
I anticipate the wording to Arcane Abeyance to be fixed in another Critical Role publication - and it’s an easy fix. The creature using the bead must be on the same plane of existence and the casting of the spell BEGINS when the bead is used - so Tiny Hut would still take 10 minutes of casting time. Lemon squeezy for a House Rule too
There are two things that in my mind can vary a "feeling" of a subclasses power level for someone. First is the campaign type and how well it matches the subclass chosen. Pick a nature cleric for a city themed whodunit adventure and it won't feel as good as playing it in a wilderness adventure with lots of beasts. So matching the character to the theme of the adventure makes an impact on enjoyability. Second is magic items. Obtaining magic items that greatly boosts a characters power vs not gaining any useful magic items can impact how a class feels. They become a part of your characters story and in some cases, specific magic items can drastically change how a character plays out in an adventure. So overall I agree with your rankings as a starting point baseline, but recognize that both campaign types and magic items can cause some fluctuations in the rankings, because both of these influences a player's enjoyment of their character.
I saw a video about making an order of scribes wizard, but flavoring it as an artist. Your spell book is a sketch book, and your quill is your magic sketch pen. The reason you can write spells so quickly is because you turn them into small doodles. And that awakened mind is like some of your illustrations coming to life to aid you. And I’ve never wanted to play order of scribes more. 👀
I am playing a scribes wizard (at level 4) next week to replace a warlock and I love the ribbon features. And flavour. I love the damage type changing, instant cast effects and speed of spell copy. They will definitely be more campaign dependent but I'm stoked
The graviturgy 2nd level feature is amazing if you have a character in your group trained in athletics. He has advantage, and his target has disadvantage. Grapple-lock!
I think the Graviturgist has two really good options for his level 2 ability. First, targeting someone's full plate can cause a lot of problems for someone suddenly carrying an additional 65 pounds, particularly if the table is using encumbrance rules. Second, they can provide a huge boost to any martial character who is grappling, because the Athletics checks used to grapple are strength based.
I think we all knew this was going to be in two parts. This channel seems to have a few things to say about wizards. We all want it yesterday but chronurgy is not allowed at all tables.
I started following what Chris had to say about D&D with "Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards: Being a God in D&D 3.5." So yes, the channel definitely has things to say about wizards!
I know people here prolly wont like this but I allow Chronurgy but just give it a "Cant be a spell with the ritual tag" And "Is limited to a spell that is a bonus action, action, reaction casting time"
@@KoryLunaa This is the best way but a tiny part of me wants to have my Chronurgy wizard's player try to have his cat familiar cast Leomund's Tiny Hut using the bead so I can describe the way in which the cat decides that the eligible creatures that can enter the hut is only itself, as it stretches and purrs with feline malice. Cats need alone time, you know
Now that you are wrapping up this series, you need to do some videos looking at comparisons between different subclasses within tiers. E.g. why a hexblade ranks ahead of the best paladins.
The thing that really attracts me to Order of Scribes never seems to get mentioned; If they lose their spell book, they can replace it over the course of a short rest. The idea of losing my spell book has always put me off playing a wizard, so for me this is huge!
You simply make copies of backups. That's a habit all wizard players need to get into. Having two or more spell books may seem crazy but it really isn't. Plus the time and money to copy is cheaper since the spells were written by you and not by another wizard. So no need to worry about rolling arcane or spending hours trying to understand someone other wizards gibberish
I hope you adress the lvl 14 illusionist feature. Yes, it is outside of the range, but it is imo the most abusable feature in the game when combined with the other illusionist features, so I think it deserves a mention
There is a lot order of the scribes brings to the table that a lot of people miss when it comes to changing damage types. Too many people have the "pokemon" mindset when it comes to damage types where they think it's best used to "use fire on the grass type" when it can be amazing if you use with say... phantasmal force, to replace the psychic damage with... well actual physical damage because it basically changes the entire effect of the spell, where normally, using phantasmal force to give someone the illusion they are on fire and having them take psychic is good, having them take actually fire damage makes it no long a spell that only effects the target creature, as their allies will very clearly see their ally burning. Shatter is a spell with a component that deals damage to objects in it's area of effect, changing it's damage type can have a tremendous effect depending on the environment because many objects are effected by different types of damage, say a wood bridge, might be damaged by thunder... but it's certainly going to be effected by fire. Flaming sphere can have it's damage changed to *not* set things on fire (psychic damage for example will not effect anything without a brain) which is good in a situation where that would be dangerous or changed to effect environment in other ways, like say, using a frozen sphere to freeze water. Fireball is another great example, as it is normally destructive to allies and the environment, send your skeletons out under cover of poison balls and also don't have to worry about damaging the room.
Don't think you mentioned graviturgy and chronurgy have some additional spells they can use. Don't think it will affect their ranking very much but they booth have some good (and bad) options available like Gift of alacrity for the chronurgist.
I wanted to point out that Momentary Stasis can be devastating against certain targets. Other spellcasters, for instance, as when a creature is incapacitated, they lose concentration. Alternatively, you could use it on any flying creature without a hover speed, as a flying creature that has it's movement dropped to zero drops to the ground. with a constitution save, it is not likely to drop a dragon, but that might be a decent use of your Chronal Shift, and forcing enemies to lose concentration is a beautiful thing.
Chronurgy is the first wizard I've played (so far, only 2 campaigns played so far) and I really loved it's level 2 features.Chronal Shift stopped two big crits in one session and forcing rerolls on important saving throws is so good. And adding gift of alacrity to almost always go first is sick.
Blade Singer's Extra Attack and Haste interaction is actually really clear Treant, I'm reading this from my phb so it can't be more RAW "that action can be used only to take the Attack Action (one WEAPON attack only)..." See it says weapon attack, not attack, not "anything else that can be done with the attack action" it only lets the creature make a weapon attack.
I think you're underselling Bladesinging just a little, because you're missing a key feature. Shadowblade. A level 2 illusion spell that replaces your weapon with a 2d8 Psychic damage attack while you maintain concentration. When cast at 3rd its 3d8, with +1d8 for every two levels higher. So, a spell that scales throughout. Add advantage in darkness, finesse, light, and thrown (20/60) that returns to with a bonus action AND can be done with booming/flame blade. So right from the start you stack dex, wear light armour. Lets say 16 Dex. If you get studded leather you're starting at 15AC+Shield which is respectable. You hit level 3 and suddenly you're a spry nightmare who could be hitting at advantage for 2d8 psychic who has either 17 or 18 ac while bladesinging, and has shield. By the time your second attack comes around you're hitting for 6d8 psychic+your blade cantrip damage. And best of all? You're still a full spellcaster. Dropping your shadowblade to concentrate on something else isn't going to be the end of the world, and you have some wonderful non concentration check spells. You get your familiars, your rituals, your utility. Your Misty steps, your counterspells, your fireballs. Your DPR is huge, especially in a dark environment. Your survivability is good. Your concentration checks get a nice bonus. You may have less INT than you like (Likely 14 or 16) but a surprisingly large amount of spells couldn't care less about your int modifier. It's honestly the most fun i've had as not only a wizard, but any class. No one expects a wizard to pull these kinds of tricks. You have more resources than you know what to do with(Every spell slot is shield or counterspell unless you need to do some AOE with synaptic static, or do some god-mage shennanigans), and if magic items come your way (which they shouldn't need to because you're self sufficient) then you can adapt by swapping to spirit shroud to accentuate that cool flametongue or whatever.
Finally the wizard video, I have been waiting for this as like most people wizard is my favourite class. I would like to say in general I have agreed with your rankings and reasoning for it, so keep it up. I would also like to point out you missed something with scribes wizards which I think is often over looked. The awakened spell book has another feature tucked away in the last paragraph. You can replace the book over the course of a short rest. So if your spell book is lost or destroyed you don't need to relearn spell or have a back up you can just get your full spellbook back. Another thing about it says it transfers all your spells into a blank book or another spellbook you are attuned to. So for the likes of spellbooks in tasha's (atlas of endless horizons and so on) you needn't copy all your spells into it or the spells from this into another. You just perform this ritual and you move all your spells into it. Anyway as I said keep up the good work and I look forward to more wizard videos perhaps a wizard build again as your last one is some years old now
Just thought I'd toss out before watching this one that I like your rankings. You explain why and what the criteria are up front, and you have more variety in tiers. Sure, I'm not an optimizer so I always think you're a little harsh, but I do at least know why you've ranked that way. Plus, sometimes I learn stuff I hadn't thought of before. Always helpful.
Another reason i think you get people saying things need to be higher is, likely due to school, a lot of people's gut reaction to a C is that it's bad. They likely also feel a B is OK. Obviously that's not how your ranking criteria works, but i think a lot of the people who watch but skip the criteria section are gonna have thay reaction.
The scribes wizard changes damage type of spells, but isn’t limited to spells that deal damage. Scribes wizard can change damage types of spells that use resistance and immunity. The sorcerer metamagic transmuted spell is what changing damage type of spells limited to damage looks like.
Hey Chris I've really enjoyed your series. One thing I noticed you glossed over with Order of Scribes wizard is that they essentially can never lose their spellbook. It doesn't come up often but it's devastating when it does.
I mean if you use it as a strike drone and for example summon demons on one end then then fork them with your team is pretty strong i imagine. However i cant imagine a lot of parties being into this kind of strategic gameplay. I am already happy when the tank stands in the door and not 10 feet in front of the door :)
@@studynot757 sorry not my native language. What i tried to say was your question was the bladesinger feels more powerful? I would argue the scribe can be really good but that needs a weird kind of playstile even your party must be into, cause you would need to play very strategically. Which is most of the time a swear word. I once get into a fight with my friends while playing risiko because i played to strategically resp. Mean. Regarding the melee. I mean its the fluff behind the subclass. When i play a bladesinger i never play him in melee. I use a ranged weapon for the extra attack and blade song as a defense while casting spellls. But that probably depends on how strong the dm tries to actually kill you cause one round of focus fire probably would have ended your character. Your ac while blade singing was probably like 20 magbe 21? Which is like every 4th attack hit on average and getting more every level and when you would fight something like a dragon would probably kill you in one round cause your AC cant be increased due to the restriction of blade song? So i cant imagine melee bladesinger be viable in a “hard” game.
Hi Treantmonk, Great video, can't wait to watch part 2! There were a couple of points where I disagreed, unless I've misunderstood the abilities. 1) Graviturgy's 10th lvl Violent Attraction feature: You can use this reaction when a party member critical hits and/or save them for when you really need to kill something. Say when a party member is down or has been swallowed by a creature. In both those situations an extra d10 damage can make a big difference. It's still not amazing but I think it's better than you think, particularly if you've a crit-fishing party member. 2) Order of Scribes 2nd lvl Wizardly Quill: I've always found that learning new spells depends heavily on the DM. Wizards are already amazing so in my experience DMs tend to be hesitant to give them even more spells, particularly if there are other spellcasters in the party, as you're probably already overshadowing them. If you're DM knows you have an ability that allows you to copy a spellbook even faster then I'd expect them to give me find worse spellbooks to find. Admittedly for me personally this has only come up in campaigns not based on adventure modules. I'm about to start CoS and I know there are some spellbooks to find, and maybe the spells in those spellbooks are set? But I still think this ability is super DM dependant and therefore likely at many tables to me useless in practise.
Momentary stasis can't be counterspelled as it isn't a spell. Can be good against a caster. Doesn't have vsm components either so can be done in a wider range of situations. Also doesn't necessarily get noticed if it fails, which can make it a much lower risk to use on a sentry or in a crowded situation.
When you are all done doing the rankings I think it would be interesting if you ranked all the classes without subclass, Wizard A, Cleric B for example. Then look at the subclasses and see how far up or down it made then move from the default position of just the class itself.
Arcane abeyance is ruled in my campaign to allow them to use an action to start casting a spell. IE a spell with a 10 minute casting time , still takes 10 minutes but the first 6 seconds of the spell are the action they used to cast the bead. I flavor it as holding a temporal loop open. It’s not perfect but unbreaks the spell.
Where is the G Tier?!! God wizard. So I'm from the School of Treantmonk's guide and I knew they would all rank high. What I really value with these guides are the "strength" of the individual subclass compared to others, even in different classes. I consult the overall chart frequently and I often review Chris's ranking and experience playing these classes. This is legendary content...G Tier!!
I am running Against the Giants for a party with a Bladesinger in, almost unhittable, but if you can knock them prone you at least get advantage to farm for crits.. but no, advantage on acrobatics cancels that almost completely.
A small additional benefit of Master Scrivener is that you don't need to have a spell prepared in order to put it into your daily scroll; It just needs to be in your book. Therefore if you have a spell you expect to cast exactly once during the day, this feature can save you a preparation slot in addition to a spellslot. The first use that comes to my mind is if there's a single party member without Darkvision, you can use the scroll to give them their daily casting of the spell. Some mildly situational spells like Hold Person could also work for this if it's likely enough to come up at least once, but you won't really miss being able to cast it more than once. Clearly not enough to alter the ranking even just within A tier (and *far* from making it S tier) but useful nonetheless.
If you can get a headband of intellect a bladesinger/eldritch knight works well and is very fun and effective. 7 fighter/6 wizard kinda completes the build in my opinion, you get a bonus action attaxk from casting a cantrip but maintain both of your attacks and the added spells from the wizard lvls are great.
It's worth mentioning that the main feature of the bladesinger is exactly what you've stated as a negative, that it's not worth multiclassing. Being a full wizard with beefy AC and concentration is so good. Yes you have to be careful about positioning before your turn starts, and that won't always be possible, but if you can boost your initiative or have other obvious targets in your party, it won't be as bad in actual play from my experience. You also have more freedom with feats in non deadly campaigns, as protecting your concentration is somewhat less urgent (still the optimal route, but not the only one now).
I’ve played 3 wizards, only 1 of them made it to “late game” spell casting (lv 8), and even then he was still being out performed by the other members of the party before he died. A wizard thrives as the creative problem solver of the group and I really felt that when I played with new players and dumb veterans since I had so many more options but once I got in with the power gamers it dropped off. Yes it’s nice to have 40 spells, yes it’s nice to have rituals out the wazoo, but your good spells are still limited by your slots, and the most important thing I learned: if the dm wants to hit your squishy 60 hp wizard to stop your “broken” spell casting they will. Wizard as a chassis is mid, arcane recovery is their best feature until higher levels, they have good subclasses but not too outlandish. I would say that they are a good class but I don’t believe the hype that they are the best in the game
For adjusting density on weapons, I think it'd be neat if like, making a weapon heavier makes it hit harder, but more difficult to swing, so it gets a -2 to hit but +2 to damage. And then making it lighter makes it more maneuverable but reduces stopping power, so it's a +2 to hit for a -2 on damage rolls. I feel like it'd make for fun, situational risk/reward.
The first wizard I played was a Scribes wizard, and at one point we fought a Salamander. I thought "he's on fire, so either he's resistant to cold, or vulnerable to it, and this character likes to reflavor everything to cold damage anyway unless he has reason not to, so why not?" And I somehow rolled a 41 on the 3rd level cold fireball, effectively eviscerating the salamander with one spell slot after vulnerability.
I think they just gave wizard too many things compared to some other classes. Learning spells just by leveling up used to be the sorcerer speciality, and wizards had to rely on spells they found. But in 5e wizards get 2 automatic spells per level, with still the unlimited potential to learn new spells they find. What if they got a single spell per level, or 1 spell per 4 levels? Having more spell slots used to be another advantage sorcerers had over wizards, but with arcane recovery the tables have turned. I think they just took all the traditional sorcerer advantages to wizard and started working from there.
I played a scribe, I really enjoyed using a force damage lightning bolt and a lightning damage tidal wave, i spent all my gold on scrolls and knew every spell I wanted. Add in some fancy story buffs and I felt indispensable to my party and did close to no damage.
Fix that would help with the Chronurgy level 10 feature be more balance: add "with a casting time of 1 action, reaction, or reaction." No passing around familiars. No Leo's Hut in middle of a fight. Etc. It's pretty easy to argue that a familiar shouldn't be "smart" enough to use the bead to cast a spell. Excepting Warlock with Pact of the Chain, a familiar's intelligence is going to be that of a beast. No sending a familiar to the pokeball after it casts an awesome concentration spell for you if it can't use the bead to begin with.
I think order of scribes is absolutely game breaking! Not because it is too powerful, but because having an invincible drone makes gameplay incredibly slow and boring. If you use it optimally, you will constantly be sending it ahead of you to look out and report. This slows down gameplay, and forces everyone to just listen to the DMs visual description while intermittently saying "Ohhh I got it! That weird statue must be... wait sorry, nevermind, I'm not there". It is all the worst parts of having the rogue scout ahead, without the mitigating factor that the rogue has to be careful for their life. I played a pact of the chain warlock for a bit, which gets a very similar feature, and we had to retire the character after a few sessions, since it made exploration so incredibly tedious.
Hi Chris. Thank you for working on this series :) On the people saying x class should be such and such ranking, I might as well share that my favourite subclass is Divine Soul Sorcerer and I am perfectly fine with your rating (B considering MC, C without considering MC if I remember correctly).
Simple ideas for Adjust Density on weapons: - finesse weapons, when heavier: lose finesse property - finesse weapons, when lighter: may be used by tiny creatures (Str requirement 13?) - heavy weapons, when lighter: lose the heavy property - heavy weapons, when heavier: disadvantage on attacks - a non heavy/finesse weapon, when lighter: gains the finesse property - a non heavy/finesse weapon, when heavier: gains the heavy property - bows when heavier: gain a damage boost equal to Str bonus, have a Str requirement of 13, and range is +50% (maybe double range is more 5e like, though it might be too much?) - bows when lighter: have their range halved (-50%) ------- Just came up with these so they might be bad ideas, but I hope they can provide food for thought. Feel free to comment and improve on the ideas.
The graviturgy control density feature has a lot of roleplay/DM centric effect, like if an enemy is in water or mud, or flying, doubling a birds weight will pretty much drop it out of the sky, also the reverse, fighter having problems climbing a rope, halve their weight.
I have taken exception to your view on Momentary Stasis. It attacks CON and incapacitates. It seems to be an anti-spellcaster ability. Incapacitation ends concentration. The main problem here is damage could also do the job. But the enemy may have counterspell or War Caster. So there are benefits over just attacking.
Initially, I HATED how base class was even a factor. I didn't quite understand the S-F, but I could jive with it but comparing subclasses of different classes felt like apples to oranges and didn't seem important or helpful. But eventually what I realized is that this system is NOT focusing on "what are the ranks of the subclasses for each class", but instead "what are the ranks of characters I can build using these subclasses." And those are not the same thing, so while I was used to the firat option as a format, I can now appreciate this too
I agree with most (90%) of your subclass ranking for all classes. I think that due to human nature you’ll have more people comment when they disagree than when they agree
I don’t really get the critique. Your ranking is so well reasoned and thorough that I’m currently using it as basis for my nerf/buff list for an upcoming campaign. Most other rankings have so much flat out bias compared with yours, and I also love your extended system. Edit; if someone tried to concentrate on a spell from a pocket dimension I’d flat out tell them they were out of range. Even most infinite range spells can’t target other planes of existence, so I see no reason why a familiar could keep bless on a party from a pocket dimension.
RAW you don't need to be within range of a spell to concentrate on it. You don't even need to be on the same plane. For instance an enemy wizard can cast Wall of Force on a party and Plane Shift out. Then the would have to wait 10 minutes or cast Disintegrate to get out without a teleport effect.
The problem with the Chronusgist's Abeyance is the same problem I have with the spell Simulacrum, which wizards can get at 13th level, but this is even more op because it basically doubles their action economy and all their spell slots
Handing of a spell bead to your familiar gets worse when you consider the spell flock of familiars. Luckily it's only once per short rest or it would be even more broken. Think dipping 3 lvls of echo knight and having your familiar concentrate on Stinking cloud while you are inside your own resilient sphere (concentrated on by another familiar) (make sure to take the blind fighting style), manifest your echo outside the sphere, while you concentrate on a higher broken spell and attacking in the mean time.
I feel that you should have rated Clerics higher, because I've basically only ever played Clerics and have no idea how other classes feel, so I just feel that Clerics should be the best. 😅 Really, we all have our preferences and opinions, but when it comes to D&D character optimization, I've learned that yours is generally far more informed than most others. I think your rankings are spot on.
Bladesinger is kind of the epitome of "A+". All of its abilities are good/strong, but have limitations, and they mostly make the Bladesinger better in situations that other Wizards might have problems like being in melee or dealing with monsters with magic resistance/high saves/immunities. Nothing that breaks the game but they're super flexible and always good.
RE: multiclassing into wizard. IMO if you want a very potent tier 2-3 martial character it pays to start there then break wizard before level 7. Currently playing a battle smith who multiclassed into war mage. Who needs a fighter/barbarian/paladin?
I usually critique based on your words tbh. Even though I am biased towards rogues and fighters because I've had some good experiences with these, when you say that the mastermind rogue lags behind when compared with other classes that maybe I detest (just a hypothetical example) I'm gonna get a little defensive about it. Don't take it personal, I'm loving this series despite my whining in the comments. Thanks for working so hard on these videos.
@@Werelight as someone who never played a druid, doesn't really like the mechanics, and had lots of people who hogged the spotlight as druids, i can easily say I'm not really a fan. Maybe detest is too strong a word for it.
@@k2k4 I’m fairly bleh on druids, myself. Their aesthetics do nothing for me, summon spells slow down the game, moon druids break the game, I prefer arcane support spells to druid ones…
@@Werelight I'll admit as someone else who likes to play martials: I can get irritated that the wizard, already one of the strongest and most versatile classes in the game, keeps getting more benefits to make them stronger (even just adding a couple extra spells in a supplement can do that, while there's rarely a commensurate benefit for martials), and that under the 5e multiclassing and feat rules it's trivially easy for them to overcome their only real weaknesses early on.
Just keep in mind that someone who agrees with you may not reach out to say "all the rankings were dead on!" - they might just be leaving a Like and moving on. You're naturally going to hear more from people who disagree :)
Aye, negativity bias.
Curse these virtual environs.
On the other hand, if an influential youtuber is misleading players - by oh, say, ranking Battlemaster Fighter the same as Arcane Archer (ahem, cough cough) - then that influential youtuber needs to be called out on it. And this is okay.
Treantmonk may be "technically right" ranking BM fighter "C", given how he sets up his ranking system - but in the real world, where all sorts of people either rush through this and don't fully grasp his ranking system - or they just don't get it - they see "C" and think BM fighter isn't very good. And that is a problem, because it is wrong and, again, misleading. Dungeon Dudes, also Canadian (for what that matters), ranked BM fighter A or S - I think I recall them saying maybe BM needs an S. Can't recall which they settled on.
Treantmonk got raked over the coals for his BM ranking - and it needed to happen - it was a mistake. It misleads a lot of people. Treantmonk is great on spellcasters. Not so great at ranking non-caster classes. I am still going to watch his videos and leave likes, even if I disagree from time to time. His virtues far outweigh his few flaws (and I have flaws, too, we all do).
I noticed in this one he said "anyway" instead of "anyways". Wow. Now THAT is a big deal .... (I am joking).
@@johneubank8543
Ooh, right, I forgot about the Battlemaster rating. Completely slipped my mind. Yeah, that was a spicy take.
Also kinda funny, since the Battle Master is the closest thing in D&D to a "Martial Caster", even more than the Arcane Archer.
@@johneubank8543 Dungeon Dudes went straight to S for the Battle Master, it being their top fighter by far. And yeah ranking BM equal to Arcane Archer is incorrect. They added Echo and Rune Knight to S later. TMs low ranking for vengeance paladin was also questionable imho.
That’s a good point. We do “command climate surveys“ in the army. They make everyone do it, otherwise people will only do the survey if they have a problem or complaint, and you don’t get an accurate reflection of the environment.
One thing I think almost every reviewer I’ve seen on UA-cam seems to forget about the Order of Scribes wizard is the fact that, if they lose their spell book, it only takes them a short rest to COMPLETELY reconstruct it with ALL the spells it contains within it at no cost.
Think about that for a minute. If any other wizard has their spell book lost or destroyed they can only transcribe those spells that they have Currently prepared and at a time and cost of one hour and 10 gold pieces per spell level for each spell copied into the new book. Any other spells that were in their spell book have to be replaced through the normal method of finding spells or leveling up. This is why other wizards have to keep backup copies of their spell books around, and those books still cost them 10 gold pieces per spell level per spell in the book to make.
This may not seem groundbreaking, but in a campaign where your wizard loses their spell book it can be devastating. For an Order of Scribes wizard it’s no big deal whatsoever. That is an incredible benefit in my opinion.
While true, I can't imagine it's very common for a DM to actually have a wizard lose their spellbook without buy-in from that player. I'm sure those campaigns exist but I'd be willing to bet it's probably not the norm.
It's also very useful in order to switch spellbooks, such as when getting one of the Tasha magic ones, or just to have one of a different style.
And if you’re caught in the cold with no fuel for a fire, hey, free fuel! You can even sit around the resultant fire as you take the short rest.
@@recursiveslacker7730 You still need an empty book to use this feature though, so it's easier to just burn that instead of the spellbook.
It's fitting that the Wizard gets the Harry Potter treatment (final installment split into two).
Gotta drag it out somehow…😕
That's just excellent 😂
Well, if it were the Voldemort treatment, it would have been split into eight parts.
Well, it might turn out that he actually gave it the Hobbit treatment...
I always thought of Harry Potter as a sorcerer maybe with a warlock dip
Purely flavor wise, Scribes Wizard has got to be my favorite in the game. Nothing else really captures that master of knowledge vibe as well as the wizard most adept at recording every single spell they come across in record time.
That and the idea of just having your manifested mind float in and summon a demon in a room while you're off somewhere else out of sight just chilling is too fun for me. Even if the manifested mind vanishes, the spell doesn't stop.
I love turning everything into a force spell
Agree. Especially in a middle/low magic campaign, the "greatest wizard in the world" being a Scribes Wizard that knows nearly everything, and has blazed the trail for higher level spellcasting gives off some hmsuper cool vibes.
@@37thgungrunts mechanical power aside, turning a fireball into a ball of mechanical fragments (for piercing damage) or just a wrecking ball, for bludgeoning, is both an immensely cool visual while also just makes you feel like a true master of magic. Like you go beyond merely what's there and can fundamentally alter spells just from your depth of knowledge alone.
@@37thgungrunts I enjoyed it. I played one for three or four sessions. It drove the DM crazy because I kept running one way and using the manifest mind to cast spells from alternate directions. I didn't even get to the point of using him for what I thought he'd be really good at, stealing spells from unwary wizards.
@@FiniteFragment
Melf's Thunder Arrow
What is sticking to the enemy and dealing damage over time? Sound.
I don't envy the task of putting these in order. Every single Wizard subclass is conceivably *someone's* favorite.
Even Necromancer. How something so cool can be so relatively bad simply brings tears.
@@aprinnyonbreak1290 I actually really like Necromancer as-is, haha. In my top 5 of Wizard subclasses (when including UA)
Well, maybe not transmutation. The rest though, yeah.
People have a strong tendency to overestimate classes they've played, because just about all of the classes/subclasses can 'feel' powerful in different moments. Most people simply don't consider that the S and A tier subclasses are incredibly, constantly powerful when optimized. There is a big 'feel' difference between a battle master fighter who gets to use manuevers and make 4+ attacks in a single turn from level 5 and outright kill many creatures, and a twilight cleric that just kinda stands next to as many people as they can. But of course, the twilight cleric is vastly more mechanically powerful. Reminds me of your god wizard origin story a bit, seems to just be how the average dnd player views power in the game is a bit skewed
Its funny because i’m in the opposite boat. I play a hexblade and love that character. I also play an eldritch knight that i really like in another campaign. Granted, i play full hexblade, but whenever i hear others talking about it i get the impression that it’s one of the most overrated subclasses ever. And my friend was trying to argue that eldritch knights are super strong and deserve like B or A tier. Meanwhile i play basically an amped eldritch knight(my spells aren’t limited to evocation and abjuration, i can get any wizard spells of any school when i get a new spell) and i think C tier makes perfect sense, maybe higher end, but honestly that difference is compensated for by the lack of a spell limitation.
My table has a level 8 twilight cleric who has only used twilight sanctuary once.
@@ATMOSK1234 wow, any idea why? It's kind of their key feature, otherwise they may as well just have a subclass-less cleric that likes twilight.
@@fabian268 Sounds like you've got a head on your shoulders then, most people certainly overrate eldritch knight in particular since they're great fun to play but even with an expanded spell list simply can't keep up on either front. They aren't as good frontliners/fighters as a battle master would be, and they certainly aren't as good spellcasters as a primary caster would be. It's an odd in between that leads to unique gameplay and occasionally being surprised at creative low level spell use, but not exactly the 'best fighter subclass' many seem to see it as. Hex blade is only truly powerful as a dip, afterwards it suffers from the typical issues with the warlocks' chassis of not enough slots and not enough versatility with those slots. May also be that many people play it in early levels when it's actually very good, so they simply believe it's powerful throughout.
I'd be careful generalizing like that. If we try using this belief as an objective tool, we're going to get into trouble.
The Ring of Spell Storing is known as one of the most powerful magical items in the game, so much so that a dm has to very careful how they appear in their games, but chronurgy is just like: here you go!
Artificers get a similar feature iirc
@@ATMOSK1234 Yes, but much worse and at a higher level. Still has the potential to break the game though.
Honestly, I wish they would just do a Sage Advice to nerf all the Familiar shenanigans. Just a simple:
"Familiars and other magically summoned creatures cannot cast spells nor use spells cast upon them."
@@agilemind6241 Remembering the Goodberry/Life Cleric exploit, I worry Crawford would just respond with "yeah, sure, go ahead, familiars cast ALL the spells they want".
@@agilemind6241 Why do we have to get some authority figure involved when the lot of them couldn't make an even vaguely balanced game to begin with?
If you DM, and shutting down some folk's favorite part of familiars is your bag, then you go ahead and render the lot of them as emotional support pets. That's your game.
Better yet, be rid of them entirely. The more options people have, the more than can circumvent your preferred version of fun, and if they're allowed to have their own fun, then that's not your favorite and you should tell on them.
Casting spell „as if you were in the books position“ is insane with teleports.. 330 ft. Misty Step.
Glad to see Order of Scribes get some much needed love. The fact alone that it makes Elemental Adept worth taking gives it a gold star in my book.
I'm sort of surprised you didn't touch on the unique spells of the chronurgy/graviturgy wizards. No other wizard gets them RAW, so in a sense, they're subclass features. Gift of alacrity stands out to me since it combos with the chronurgist's initiative bonus to take it from probably going first, to almost certainly going first. Graviturgy also gets the best first level area blast spell in the game IMO.
I mean, can't any other wizard copy them from a spellbook or scroll? Granted, there does still need to be a first source of them.
Those scrolls, or other homebrew spells that work in a similar manner, might also be good sidequest loot for a wizard.
Fortunes favor is also shockingly powerful at high levels when gold is no longer an issue in most campaigns. I know this is beyond the scope of this video, but selecting fortunes favor as your spell mastery and bringing around 2,000+ gold worth of pearls all the time means constant luck active for your whole party. And I find it quite fitting for a time Wizard to be manipulating time to give his party members better odds of succeeding important saving throws.
@@OnlyTheBestx And even if gold is an issue, you could team up with a Creation Bard (if your DM allows them to create spell components)
@@aprinnyonbreak1290 officially no, i believe they aren't on the wizard class spell list. The Wildemount book has some suggestions for adding it to spell list for other classes. The wizard is certainly the most natural, but it isn't written into the rules.
Do those subclasses have thole spells on the list out of the box, or do they have to find scrolls as other spellcasters?
I just imagine spell preparation for wizard as someone with terrible memory or scattered thoughts taking their huge book and using a limited number of tabs to bookmark what they need for the day.
I think of Preperations as Cramming for a Test in which you convince the Universe to do something it normally wouldn't. The Test is Pass/Fail, in Short Essay Form. And, while you are taking it, some wyverns are trying to jab you with their poisoned stingers. Also, your friends might die if you mess up.
I think it reflects the intellectual approach to magic very well, the wizard always has the gist of their spells in mind but in order to actually cast it they need to remind themselves of the specifics of it, the formula, incantations, or whatevs.
In the old systems, spell slots were basically pre-filled by preparing spells, in an attempt to model Vancian Magic where every spell is its own living entity that would leave your mind once you've cast it.
Fifth Edition simplifies its rules to where that model doesn't work anymore, but it doesn't really offer a way to interpret spell-preparation that *does* work for the wizard.
@@JohnvanCapel I get the old thought, too. Like setting up the dominoes, or setting the mousetrap.
I'm still baffled that the bladsinger didn't get an ability to use Intelligence for attack rolls but the battlefield Artificier can.
Balance probably.
They're very strong as is, with this they'd be ridiculous
I think another thing throwing off rankings between people is that your scale is more gorgiving to begin with. Your 'C' is 'perfectly fine' and your 'D' is 'can be fine with a bit of work'. A lot of oeople's ranking/ratings/what have you are more in line with (and likely influenced by) the US education system, where 'A'/4.0/100%/top rank is the expected result, and every point or tier from which you deviate from that is a measure of how increasingly you've failed to measure up to par.
This is why I was a little surprised at the beginning when the bladesinger rated A. Oh, I see, so they are all at least As then. lol.
I found your introduction about ranking and the real take away is about people not about subclasses to be very interesting. That rings very true for me as well. In every video you say, "D&D is for everyone." I think it's an important phrase - and it's more complex than it sounds. Every table is different. Every DM and player - different in their approach to the game, to storytelling, to mechanics, to rules, even to what they want from the game. Every single person who plays is looking for their own good time. That's why it's so hard to find a group and when you do, so hard to leave a good one. It works for your experience.
All that being said, I LOVE your analysis videos. I love your rankings and the way you look at spells and abilities in terms of versatility and effectiveness across levels. When I'm picking spells, I always come and listen to your discussions of them to consider what I'm taking and why.
Your analysis is statistic, data, and mechanic based - also based on your own experiences and the table where you roll the dice. Not everyone has had that experience or, to be fair, wants it.
The real truth is, it doesn't matter how "S" Moon Druid is - I have zero interest in druids. I've never played one and I don't expect that I will. My ranking would be ridiculously different from yours - and it would be based on different criteria.
I respect your analysis for what it is - solid examination of mechanics and a values based ranking of those mechanics. It helps that I also value those and I find myself nodding way more often than disagreeing with your explanations. In fact, I don't think that I've ever disagreed with your analysis (except for the warlock invocations ranking one - and that is completely based on my experience and my ability to utilize/abuse an invocation at my table.) I recommend your channel to anyone who is looking to build a character and wants to know what works best / effectively, optimally.
I don't think I would recommend your channel to someone who was asking, "What's the best set of spells for creating dramatic stage effects - combat isn't really a consideration?"
Your ability to critically and analytically break down a feature into its mechanic parts and academically examine utility and efficacy, is brilliant. Period. You are really freaking good at what you do.
It's just that not everyone plays like you do. So your analysis doesn't sit with them - they need a different analysis because they have their own values. Subjective. Opinion. Exactly as the disclaimer said from day 1.
So I guess the point here is: You're awesome. I love what you're doing and how you're helping me think about what I'm doing at the table. Please keep it up. Also, more is better and if I ever can, I will support. Don't worry that you're not everyone's exact cup of tea. Some people don't even like tea.
I had no interest in Druids until I picked up Bonsai in my 30's. Suddenly they were fascinating and something I could identify with.
23:30 I beg to differ on the 2 lvl dip into wizard. When combined with a half caster like artificer, eldritch knight, or arcane trickster, the synergy is quite good. And with ritual casting and arcane recovery, this really adds to your spellcasting to these lesser spellcasting classes.
Plus the ability to magpie spells off of scrolls or defeated wizards is also pretty good, especially when a lot of other caster's main drawbacks is a limited number of spells known.
A 2 level dip can be quite effective on those, though if there's a chance of getting to level 20 there's no chance I'm multiclassing out of Artificer, as their capstone is too much fun.
And I actually prefer swapping out of Eldritch Knight to straight Wizard after 7 levels for more spells, typically into War Wizard or Chronurgy/Divination. I do very much like a short dip on Arcane Trickster, though.
I agree. especially with the battle smith combined with war magics lvl 2 features just adds more to it.
One thing you didn't mention in Chronomancer & Graviturgist is that in a campaign that allows them at all, they are the only subclasses that can learn Dunamancy spells without special dispensation from your DM. And there are some strong spells in there other wizards cannot normally learn.
They aren't in AL games and it seems like many other games allow them in any setting and let all wizards use dunamancy.
The DM has to be very RAW inclined to only allow those spells to those 2 subclasses if they already allow stuff from the book anyways.
There are ways to learn Dunamancy outside those two subclasses, when you encounter the phrase "from any spell list". For example, Death Clerics get a free Necromancy Cantrip, and Sapping Sting is an option.
@@MyRegularNameWasTaken Or pact of the tome warlock, or bard through magical secrets, maybe geine warlock through limited wish might be able to replicate them or anyone with wish could also.
Of course things can vary at individual tables. But it doesn't seem Treantmonk normally takes house rules into account for rankings, though he does sometimes mention common ones. And as it is written, only these 2 subclasses would typically be able to pick them up by default. Though the DM can of course allow it if he wishes. So I still think the point stands that this does affect the power level of these 2 subclasses, as written.
For Chronurgy I would definitely change it to you can only store a spell in the bead that has a casting time of one action. And for the familiar, I would say that moving it to another dimension would break concentration. I feel like concentrating on a spell affecting a different dimension should not be easy.
Am I the only person who misses the Spellcraft skill? I feel like scenarios like this are exactly what the Spellcraft skill should exist for.
"You're holding your magical focus in another dimension, buster, that's at least a DC 20 check"
But, anyways.
@@aprinnyonbreak1290 I don’t know what the Spellcraft skill is, is that from an earlier addition?
I'd modify it so that the casting time coming out of the bead is the standard casting time; if the spell would normally take an hour, it still takes an hour.
As for specific spells that still break it, like Find Familiar, I'd probably let clever players do so once, then put it on a ban list of spells that can't go in the bead. Just like I don't let players play as Aarokocra, I have no problem saying, "Sorry, that is way more powerful than I am ready to balance around. Congratulations, you have made something too good." I say it with sincerity, but also with clarity.
@@danielbernhardt1327
Yeah. Back in the day, it was involved in things like counterspells and certain specific spell interactions, that have mostly been simplified or else baked into specific spells these days.
But, ironically, I feel like Concentration adds more reason than ever for there to be a skill involved in maintaining it through various weird conditions besides standard breakage. Like maintaining concentration on an effect that is in a different dimension than you.
Man do I have bad news for you about the Banishment spell...
My favorite primary class to dip into wizard is rogue. Arcane trickster plus bladsinger is really nice. Eventually the goal would be bladesinger 6 arcane trickster x.
My Arcane Trickster took moderately armored feat and I went War Wizard. It is so good it's stupid!
I have this - Arcane Trickster 3/Bladesinger 13 at the moment. :)
I really appreciated the perspicacious intro. Rankings that roughly follow a centered bell curve DO make much more sense and are much more useful than those that would put the vast majority of options into B-tier or higher.
However, I do believe that some degree of an upward trend is warranted. Deviating from a perfect bell curve with a B-tier more populated than D and an A much larger than E, to an even greater extent than you have currently, is something I see as a commendation of a well designed and balanced game. I'm not going to claim that 5e is perfect, but I do think it would be more honest to how well designed it is in general if your chart were shifted *slightly* closer to the extremely inaccurate one you showed at the beginning.
I don't think very many things should move, nor should they move very far. But my first choices for doing so remain Battle Masters, Arcane Tricksters, and Artificers as a whole. Still, I agree with the overwhelming majority of what you determined. We all really appreciate the exercise and recognize how much work went into it.
Battle Master should definitely be ranked higher, Chris' argument for why it was in the C-tier was that it was supposedly hard to optimize and easy to screw up - which I don't agree with at all, at least not compared to most full spellcasters.
If in doubt, simply put your highest score into DEX, get Crossbow Expert and Sharpshooter and use all of your combat superiority dice on sharpshooter precision attacks. Voilà, you just made a highly effective character without even really diving into other maneuver options. You can't really do that with any of the higher ranked full spellcasters.
The premise of a bell curve being the ideal spread is kinda undone by giving each rank a basic meaning. If you say things like this rank is difficult to make good but can work in the right circumstances, this rank is for th broken classes, etc... then that's already allowing for any kind of spread.
Also, I don't think that putting a lot in B tier or higher makes much sense. There just aren't that many good or great subclasses.
I would rank a lot of classes even lower than he does. My bar for "acceptable" is clearly higher.
I appreciate how the more intriguing subclasses are in the first part while the more "common" ones are left for the latter part.
I'm more inclined to agree with a fairly even distribution of rankings over one skewed in either direction. I love me a bell-curve.
42:15 For some reason your deadpan delivery of "that's pretty funny" made me laugh and oh no I want to play a graviturgist now
Honestly, I have agreed with the vast majority of your rankings. Of course there where exceptions once in a while, but in all honesty, at least from an objective mechanical point of view I feel that you are pretty spot on for the most part.
I think my biggest disagreement is the Paladin, mostly just from a grading philosophy standpoint, rather than how they were graded.
I think that differences between subclasses should be magnified a bit, so that something like the Paladin, where "this is awful, but hey, it's still a Paladin, C tier" doesn't happen.
That and Wild Magic Sorcerer. It's fun, but, I feel, is quite possibly the only subclass in the game that actually makes the base class worse, since the wild casting table feature subtly discourages noncombat casting, especially during intense social gameplay, where accidentally farting a magic missile into King Steve's face will end the campaign then and there. It also asks a lot of the GM. It's way worse.
But otherwise, yeah, mostly agrees.
@@aprinnyonbreak1290 Is Wild Magic Sorcerer really the only one that makes the base class worse? Looking at you, Berzerker - although I suppose you don't HAVE to frenzy, so it is just a non feature at best.
@@aprinnyonbreak1290 In general, paladins just have really minor subclass features, so two paladins vary little in strength regardless of subclass. And when you're ranking every subclass in the game against each other, that small difference in overall character power results in a small range in rankings.
@@RandomToon1
Exactly.
The Berserker feature is an option. A bad one, but there's nothing stopping you from just playing your Berserker as a subclassless Barbarian 99, or even 100% of the time.
It's also not the same as "bad build" subclasses, like the Storm Sorcerer, which is only worse than a sub classless Sorcerer if you let the subclass determine the spells you pick.
Wild Magic is a different beast. It's unlikely, but always possible to be forced to roll on the Wild Magic table off of the casting of any levelled spell, which means it's something you need to consider whenever you want to cast the spell, but a wild magic result could prove absolutely catastrophic, which as a whole starts to discourage sensitive and nonessential spellcasting altogether, and you can't bypass this just by ignoring subclass features like you can with the Berserker.
And that goes double or triple if you actually have used the feature that lets the DM decide when a roll happens, depending on the DM you have.
It brings to mind that old argument for natural 1's always autofailing, and natural 20's always autosucceeding. If your car has a 90% chance of working normally, a 5% chance of teleporting you to work instantly, and a 5% chance of exploding the moment you insert the key, most people would stop using their car. It's less than 5% for the WM Sorcerer, but still enough exploding cars to discourage using your car for anything besides your most essential travel requirements.
And, of course, a feature that has, more or less baked into it, a "once per round, as a free action, bug the DM about this" feature is also sometimes mysteriously tied to unfortunate accidents befalling the character.
Finally lets gooo. I’ve been waiting 3 months for this
Just wanted to stop by and say I appriciate this series, even if I disagree with some of your rankings. You do a good enough job of explaining the why of the rankings that I'm able to interpolate them and figure out the ranking in my own games (e.g. my group usually has 2 combat encounters per day, with a reliable short rest between them). I'm looking forward to using the completed list if I even become a DM to either steer my players away from the F and S tiers, or to work with them to make adjustments that feel fun and reasonable.
I agree most of the F tiers are bad, and even quite a bit of the B, C, D and E tiers, I don't think most of the S tiers are overpowered, but just need a watchful DM or somewhat restrained player so they are not abused.
Should also say that when I was playing my order of scribes wizard. "Silence" was one of my favorite ritual spells to cast, with its level 2 feature. If we were in combat facung spellcasters or trying to be discreet, or doing infiltration, it was great to basically be able to cast silence instantly without using a spell slot. Also worked amazingly well since we didn't have a rogue in the party and this allowed my PC to use "knock without alerting anyone, so I could open a door quickly while saving on spell slots when we needed to be quick.
As I saw the video, I was surprised to see the short length. Then I saw: part one of two.
What I really like about Bladesinger is that it feels like a stance system. I love stuff like that.
I'm pleased to see where wizard lands so far. It's not a broken class, and the subclasses are all basically good. In the next video, among the PHB subclasses, I expect a wider variance. D&D is a game of doing, all spells have greater effect than a high save or AC.
You got my like and subscribe in the intro. Most of my comments tend to be nitpick critiques on how harshly some classes get put down in your ratings, but you nailed it that we as a community and often individuals typically fail to see the full picture, myself included. 👏👏👍👍
I anticipate the wording to Arcane Abeyance to be fixed in another Critical Role publication - and it’s an easy fix. The creature using the bead must be on the same plane of existence and the casting of the spell BEGINS when the bead is used - so Tiny Hut would still take 10 minutes of casting time. Lemon squeezy for a House Rule too
There are two things that in my mind can vary a "feeling" of a subclasses power level for someone.
First is the campaign type and how well it matches the subclass chosen. Pick a nature cleric for a city themed whodunit adventure and it won't feel as good as playing it in a wilderness adventure with lots of beasts. So matching the character to the theme of the adventure makes an impact on enjoyability.
Second is magic items. Obtaining magic items that greatly boosts a characters power vs not gaining any useful magic items can impact how a class feels. They become a part of your characters story and in some cases, specific magic items can drastically change how a character plays out in an adventure.
So overall I agree with your rankings as a starting point baseline, but recognize that both campaign types and magic items can cause some fluctuations in the rankings, because both of these influences a player's enjoyment of their character.
I saw a video about making an order of scribes wizard, but flavoring it as an artist. Your spell book is a sketch book, and your quill is your magic sketch pen. The reason you can write spells so quickly is because you turn them into small doodles. And that awakened mind is like some of your illustrations coming to life to aid you. And I’ve never wanted to play order of scribes more. 👀
I am playing a scribes wizard (at level 4) next week to replace a warlock and I love the ribbon features. And flavour. I love the damage type changing, instant cast effects and speed of spell copy. They will definitely be more campaign dependent but I'm stoked
I'm so excited to see Conjuration ranked. I know it's not a great subclass, but Conjuration Wizard has been one of my favorite Wizard subclasses.
I think a lot of folks focus on the rankings too much and ignore your commentary, which I find to be even more valuable.
The graviturgy 2nd level feature is amazing if you have a character in your group trained in athletics. He has advantage, and his target has disadvantage. Grapple-lock!
Okay, but for Graviturgy Wizard consider the following: *One of their party Members is a Rune Knight Barbarian Minotaur named Get On Up!
I think the Graviturgist has two really good options for his level 2 ability. First, targeting someone's full plate can cause a lot of problems for someone suddenly carrying an additional 65 pounds, particularly if the table is using encumbrance rules. Second, they can provide a huge boost to any martial character who is grappling, because the Athletics checks used to grapple are strength based.
I think we all knew this was going to be in two parts.
This channel seems to have a few things to say about wizards.
We all want it yesterday but chronurgy is not allowed at all tables.
I started following what Chris had to say about D&D with "Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards: Being a God in D&D 3.5." So yes, the channel definitely has things to say about wizards!
I know people here prolly wont like this but I allow Chronurgy but just give it a
"Cant be a spell with the ritual tag"
And
"Is limited to a spell that is a bonus action, action, reaction casting time"
@@KoryLunaa This is the best way but a tiny part of me wants to have my Chronurgy wizard's player try to have his cat familiar cast Leomund's Tiny Hut using the bead so I can describe the way in which the cat decides that the eligible creatures that can enter the hut is only itself, as it stretches and purrs with feline malice. Cats need alone time, you know
@@JB-xl2jc
Well, I know what homebrew flavor spell I'm gonna give as a scroll next to my Players
Now that you are wrapping up this series, you need to do some videos looking at comparisons between different subclasses within tiers. E.g. why a hexblade ranks ahead of the best paladins.
The thing that really attracts me to Order of Scribes never seems to get mentioned; If they lose their spell book, they can replace it over the course of a short rest. The idea of losing my spell book has always put me off playing a wizard, so for me this is huge!
You simply make copies of backups. That's a habit all wizard players need to get into. Having two or more spell books may seem crazy but it really isn't. Plus the time and money to copy is cheaper since the spells were written by you and not by another wizard. So no need to worry about rolling arcane or spending hours trying to understand someone other wizards gibberish
I hope you adress the lvl 14 illusionist feature. Yes, it is outside of the range, but it is imo the most abusable feature in the game when combined with the other illusionist features, so I think it deserves a mention
There is a lot order of the scribes brings to the table that a lot of people miss when it comes to changing damage types. Too many people have the "pokemon" mindset when it comes to damage types where they think it's best used to "use fire on the grass type" when it can be amazing if you use with say... phantasmal force, to replace the psychic damage with... well actual physical damage because it basically changes the entire effect of the spell, where normally, using phantasmal force to give someone the illusion they are on fire and having them take psychic is good, having them take actually fire damage makes it no long a spell that only effects the target creature, as their allies will very clearly see their ally burning.
Shatter is a spell with a component that deals damage to objects in it's area of effect, changing it's damage type can have a tremendous effect depending on the environment because many objects are effected by different types of damage, say a wood bridge, might be damaged by thunder... but it's certainly going to be effected by fire.
Flaming sphere can have it's damage changed to *not* set things on fire (psychic damage for example will not effect anything without a brain) which is good in a situation where that would be dangerous or changed to effect environment in other ways, like say, using a frozen sphere to freeze water.
Fireball is another great example, as it is normally destructive to allies and the environment, send your skeletons out under cover of poison balls and also don't have to worry about damaging the room.
And imagine if cloudkill was actually an effective damage type!
@@recursiveslacker7730 mine deals force, it's brutal.
The moment we all have been waiting for, can't wait to see the rest! Excellent rankings
Thank you so much for putting these rankings together. I'm following your advice since Pathfinder and I'm still loving them. 👍
The God Wizard Speaks on Wizards. We'll need an in depth two parter thank you.
Don't think you mentioned graviturgy and chronurgy have some additional spells they can use. Don't think it will affect their ranking very much but they booth have some good (and bad) options available like Gift of alacrity for the chronurgist.
Nice, the class rating we have all be waiting for!!!
I wanted to point out that Momentary Stasis can be devastating against certain targets. Other spellcasters, for instance, as when a creature is incapacitated, they lose concentration. Alternatively, you could use it on any flying creature without a hover speed, as a flying creature that has it's movement dropped to zero drops to the ground.
with a constitution save, it is not likely to drop a dragon, but that might be a decent use of your Chronal Shift, and forcing enemies to lose concentration is a beautiful thing.
Chronurgy is the first wizard I've played (so far, only 2 campaigns played so far) and I really loved it's level 2 features.Chronal Shift stopped two big crits in one session and forcing rerolls on important saving throws is so good. And adding gift of alacrity to almost always go first is sick.
Blade Singer's Extra Attack and Haste interaction is actually really clear Treant, I'm reading this from my phb so it can't be more RAW "that action can be used only to take the Attack Action (one WEAPON attack only)..." See it says weapon attack, not attack, not "anything else that can be done with the attack action" it only lets the creature make a weapon attack.
I think you're underselling Bladesinging just a little, because you're missing a key feature. Shadowblade. A level 2 illusion spell that replaces your weapon with a 2d8 Psychic damage attack while you maintain concentration. When cast at 3rd its 3d8, with +1d8 for every two levels higher. So, a spell that scales throughout. Add advantage in darkness, finesse, light, and thrown (20/60) that returns to with a bonus action AND can be done with booming/flame blade.
So right from the start you stack dex, wear light armour. Lets say 16 Dex. If you get studded leather you're starting at 15AC+Shield which is respectable. You hit level 3 and suddenly you're a spry nightmare who could be hitting at advantage for 2d8 psychic who has either 17 or 18 ac while bladesinging, and has shield. By the time your second attack comes around you're hitting for 6d8 psychic+your blade cantrip damage. And best of all? You're still a full spellcaster. Dropping your shadowblade to concentrate on something else isn't going to be the end of the world, and you have some wonderful non concentration check spells. You get your familiars, your rituals, your utility. Your Misty steps, your counterspells, your fireballs. Your DPR is huge, especially in a dark environment. Your survivability is good. Your concentration checks get a nice bonus. You may have less INT than you like (Likely 14 or 16) but a surprisingly large amount of spells couldn't care less about your int modifier.
It's honestly the most fun i've had as not only a wizard, but any class. No one expects a wizard to pull these kinds of tricks. You have more resources than you know what to do with(Every spell slot is shield or counterspell unless you need to do some AOE with synaptic static, or do some god-mage shennanigans), and if magic items come your way (which they shouldn't need to because you're self sufficient) then you can adapt by swapping to spirit shroud to accentuate that cool flametongue or whatever.
Finally the wizard video, I have been waiting for this as like most people wizard is my favourite class.
I would like to say in general I have agreed with your rankings and reasoning for it, so keep it up.
I would also like to point out you missed something with scribes wizards which I think is often over looked.
The awakened spell book has another feature tucked away in the last paragraph. You can replace the book over the course of a short rest. So if your spell book is lost or destroyed you don't need to relearn spell or have a back up you can just get your full spellbook back.
Another thing about it says it transfers all your spells into a blank book or another spellbook you are attuned to. So for the likes of spellbooks in tasha's (atlas of endless horizons and so on) you needn't copy all your spells into it or the spells from this into another. You just perform this ritual and you move all your spells into it.
Anyway as I said keep up the good work and I look forward to more wizard videos perhaps a wizard build again as your last one is some years old now
I know this whole series was about legal subclasses, but id really like to see you do a "Subclasses Ranked: Extra" and do the Mercer Blood Hunter!
Just thought I'd toss out before watching this one that I like your rankings. You explain why and what the criteria are up front, and you have more variety in tiers. Sure, I'm not an optimizer so I always think you're a little harsh, but I do at least know why you've ranked that way.
Plus, sometimes I learn stuff I hadn't thought of before. Always helpful.
Acrobatics is good for avoiding grapple, good thematically and mechanically. Love your lists! they are great!
(blade singer)
13:30 when he describes wizards as "barebones"
My Lich Wizard: *nods*
Another reason i think you get people saying things need to be higher is, likely due to school, a lot of people's gut reaction to a C is that it's bad. They likely also feel a B is OK. Obviously that's not how your ranking criteria works, but i think a lot of the people who watch but skip the criteria section are gonna have thay reaction.
The scribes wizard changes damage type of spells, but isn’t limited to spells that deal damage.
Scribes wizard can change damage types of spells that use resistance and immunity.
The sorcerer metamagic transmuted spell is what changing damage type of spells limited to damage looks like.
TFW you've been waiting since June to see if War Wizard gets ranked above Bladesinger but you have to wait at least a few more days... =)
Hey Chris I've really enjoyed your series. One thing I noticed you glossed over with Order of Scribes wizard is that they essentially can never lose their spellbook. It doesn't come up often but it's devastating when it does.
I’m playing a Bladesinger and an Order of Scribes right now and honestly the bladesinger feels more powerful
I mean if you use it as a strike drone and for example summon demons on one end then then fork them with your team is pretty strong i imagine. However i cant imagine a lot of parties being into this kind of strategic gameplay. I am already happy when the tank stands in the door and not 10 feet in front of the door :)
@@CaitSith87 I get into melee every session with my bladesinger and they’re fine. I never have issues with them in melee
@@studynot757 sorry not my native language. What i tried to say was your question was the bladesinger feels more powerful? I would argue the scribe can be really good but that needs a weird kind of playstile even your party must be into, cause you would need to play very strategically. Which is most of the time a swear word. I once get into a fight with my friends while playing risiko because i played to strategically resp. Mean.
Regarding the melee. I mean its the fluff behind the subclass. When i play a bladesinger i never play him in melee. I use a ranged weapon for the extra attack and blade song as a defense while casting spellls. But that probably depends on how strong the dm tries to actually kill you cause one round of focus fire probably would have ended your character. Your ac while blade singing was probably like 20 magbe 21? Which is like every 4th attack hit on average and getting more every level and when you would fight something like a dragon would probably kill you in one round cause your AC cant be increased due to the restriction of blade song? So i cant imagine melee bladesinger be viable in a “hard” game.
Hi Treantmonk,
Great video, can't wait to watch part 2! There were a couple of points where I disagreed, unless I've misunderstood the abilities.
1) Graviturgy's 10th lvl Violent Attraction feature: You can use this reaction when a party member critical hits and/or save them for when you really need to kill something. Say when a party member is down or has been swallowed by a creature. In both those situations an extra d10 damage can make a big difference. It's still not amazing but I think it's better than you think, particularly if you've a crit-fishing party member.
2) Order of Scribes 2nd lvl Wizardly Quill: I've always found that learning new spells depends heavily on the DM. Wizards are already amazing so in my experience DMs tend to be hesitant to give them even more spells, particularly if there are other spellcasters in the party, as you're probably already overshadowing them. If you're DM knows you have an ability that allows you to copy a spellbook even faster then I'd expect them to give me find worse spellbooks to find. Admittedly for me personally this has only come up in campaigns not based on adventure modules. I'm about to start CoS and I know there are some spellbooks to find, and maybe the spells in those spellbooks are set? But I still think this ability is super DM dependant and therefore likely at many tables to me useless in practise.
A 2 parter for the wizard should've seen this coming
I am here for Wizard content, so I'm happy with this video.
Momentary stasis can't be counterspelled as it isn't a spell.
Can be good against a caster. Doesn't have vsm components either so can be done in a wider range of situations.
Also doesn't necessarily get noticed if it fails, which can make it a much lower risk to use on a sentry or in a crowded situation.
When you are all done doing the rankings I think it would be interesting if you ranked all the classes without subclass, Wizard A, Cleric B for example. Then look at the subclasses and see how far up or down it made then move from the default position of just the class itself.
I was waiting SOOOO MUCHHH
Arcane abeyance is ruled in my campaign to allow them to use an action to start casting a spell. IE a spell with a 10 minute casting time , still takes 10 minutes but the first 6 seconds of the spell are the action they used to cast the bead. I flavor it as holding a temporal loop open. It’s not perfect but unbreaks the spell.
I think Bladesinger was lest 'the one subclass to fix' and more 'the one subclass worth keeping around'.
I think the only fix it needs is prying off the Elf requirement.
Uh, same for that awful Dwarf subclass, I guess.
Where is the G Tier?!! God wizard. So I'm from the School of Treantmonk's guide and I knew they would all rank high. What I really value with these guides are the "strength" of the individual subclass compared to others, even in different classes. I consult the overall chart frequently and I often review Chris's ranking and experience playing these classes. This is legendary content...G Tier!!
Advantage on Acrobatics is a ribbon feature? Someone clearly hasn’t been grappled a lot….
I am running Against the Giants for a party with a Bladesinger in, almost unhittable, but if you can knock them prone you at least get advantage to farm for crits.. but no, advantage on acrobatics cancels that almost completely.
A small additional benefit of Master Scrivener is that you don't need to have a spell prepared in order to put it into your daily scroll; It just needs to be in your book. Therefore if you have a spell you expect to cast exactly once during the day, this feature can save you a preparation slot in addition to a spellslot. The first use that comes to my mind is if there's a single party member without Darkvision, you can use the scroll to give them their daily casting of the spell. Some mildly situational spells like Hold Person could also work for this if it's likely enough to come up at least once, but you won't really miss being able to cast it more than once.
Clearly not enough to alter the ranking even just within A tier (and *far* from making it S tier) but useful nonetheless.
If you can get a headband of intellect a bladesinger/eldritch knight works well and is very fun and effective. 7 fighter/6 wizard kinda completes the build in my opinion, you get a bonus action attaxk from casting a cantrip but maintain both of your attacks and the added spells from the wizard lvls are great.
It's worth mentioning that the main feature of the bladesinger is exactly what you've stated as a negative, that it's not worth multiclassing. Being a full wizard with beefy AC and concentration is so good. Yes you have to be careful about positioning before your turn starts, and that won't always be possible, but if you can boost your initiative or have other obvious targets in your party, it won't be as bad in actual play from my experience. You also have more freedom with feats in non deadly campaigns, as protecting your concentration is somewhat less urgent (still the optimal route, but not the only one now).
I’ve played 3 wizards, only 1 of them made it to “late game” spell casting (lv 8), and even then he was still being out performed by the other members of the party before he died. A wizard thrives as the creative problem solver of the group and I really felt that when I played with new players and dumb veterans since I had so many more options but once I got in with the power gamers it dropped off. Yes it’s nice to have 40 spells, yes it’s nice to have rituals out the wazoo, but your good spells are still limited by your slots, and the most important thing I learned: if the dm wants to hit your squishy 60 hp wizard to stop your “broken” spell casting they will. Wizard as a chassis is mid, arcane recovery is their best feature until higher levels, they have good subclasses but not too outlandish. I would say that they are a good class but I don’t believe the hype that they are the best in the game
For adjusting density on weapons, I think it'd be neat if like, making a weapon heavier makes it hit harder, but more difficult to swing, so it gets a -2 to hit but +2 to damage. And then making it lighter makes it more maneuverable but reduces stopping power, so it's a +2 to hit for a -2 on damage rolls. I feel like it'd make for fun, situational risk/reward.
The first wizard I played was a Scribes wizard, and at one point we fought a Salamander. I thought "he's on fire, so either he's resistant to cold, or vulnerable to it, and this character likes to reflavor everything to cold damage anyway unless he has reason not to, so why not?" And I somehow rolled a 41 on the 3rd level cold fireball, effectively eviscerating the salamander with one spell slot after vulnerability.
I think they just gave wizard too many things compared to some other classes. Learning spells just by leveling up used to be the sorcerer speciality, and wizards had to rely on spells they found. But in 5e wizards get 2 automatic spells per level, with still the unlimited potential to learn new spells they find. What if they got a single spell per level, or 1 spell per 4 levels?
Having more spell slots used to be another advantage sorcerers had over wizards, but with arcane recovery the tables have turned. I think they just took all the traditional sorcerer advantages to wizard and started working from there.
Wizards learned two spells per level in 3.5e, too. It's not just a 5e thing.
@@felyndiira yeah, I'm thinking more of the 2e... But your point is valid.
That would definitely be a massive nerf to wizards, making them far weaker than e.g. sorcerer.
Wizards being good is a dnd tradition.
I played a scribe, I really enjoyed using a force damage lightning bolt and a lightning damage tidal wave, i spent all my gold on scrolls and knew every spell I wanted. Add in some fancy story buffs and I felt indispensable to my party and did close to no damage.
Fix that would help with the Chronurgy level 10 feature be more balance: add "with a casting time of 1 action, reaction, or reaction." No passing around familiars. No Leo's Hut in middle of a fight. Etc. It's pretty easy to argue that a familiar shouldn't be "smart" enough to use the bead to cast a spell. Excepting Warlock with Pact of the Chain, a familiar's intelligence is going to be that of a beast. No sending a familiar to the pokeball after it casts an awesome concentration spell for you if it can't use the bead to begin with.
Just when I thought today couldn't possibly get any better! Chris, you sir, rock it like a hurricane
I think order of scribes is absolutely game breaking! Not because it is too powerful, but because having an invincible drone makes gameplay incredibly slow and boring.
If you use it optimally, you will constantly be sending it ahead of you to look out and report. This slows down gameplay, and forces everyone to just listen to the DMs visual description while intermittently saying "Ohhh I got it! That weird statue must be... wait sorry, nevermind, I'm not there".
It is all the worst parts of having the rogue scout ahead, without the mitigating factor that the rogue has to be careful for their life. I played a pact of the chain warlock for a bit, which gets a very similar feature, and we had to retire the character after a few sessions, since it made exploration so incredibly tedious.
Hi Chris. Thank you for working on this series :)
On the people saying x class should be such and such ranking, I might as well share that my favourite subclass is Divine Soul Sorcerer and I am perfectly fine with your rating (B considering MC, C without considering MC if I remember correctly).
The one we've been waiting for!
Simple ideas for Adjust Density on weapons:
- finesse weapons, when heavier: lose finesse property
- finesse weapons, when lighter: may be used by tiny creatures (Str requirement 13?)
- heavy weapons, when lighter: lose the heavy property
- heavy weapons, when heavier: disadvantage on attacks
- a non heavy/finesse weapon, when lighter: gains the finesse property
- a non heavy/finesse weapon, when heavier: gains the heavy property
- bows when heavier: gain a damage boost equal to Str bonus, have a Str requirement of 13, and range is +50% (maybe double range is more 5e like, though it might be too much?)
- bows when lighter: have their range halved (-50%)
-------
Just came up with these so they might be bad ideas, but I hope they can provide food for thought.
Feel free to comment and improve on the ideas.
One of the cool flavor things you can do with scrub wizard is change the name of the spell with the damage type "wall of death" for necrotic and so on
Ooh, I like that.
The graviturgy control density feature has a lot of roleplay/DM centric effect, like if an enemy is in water or mud, or flying, doubling a birds weight will pretty much drop it out of the sky, also the reverse, fighter having problems climbing a rope, halve their weight.
I have taken exception to your view on Momentary Stasis. It attacks CON and incapacitates. It seems to be an anti-spellcaster ability. Incapacitation ends concentration. The main problem here is damage could also do the job. But the enemy may have counterspell or War Caster. So there are benefits over just attacking.
Initially, I HATED how base class was even a factor. I didn't quite understand the S-F, but I could jive with it but comparing subclasses of different classes felt like apples to oranges and didn't seem important or helpful.
But eventually what I realized is that this system is NOT focusing on "what are the ranks of the subclasses for each class", but instead "what are the ranks of characters I can build using these subclasses." And those are not the same thing, so while I was used to the firat option as a format, I can now appreciate this too
I agree with most (90%) of your subclass ranking for all classes. I think that due to human nature you’ll have more people comment when they disagree than when they agree
For sure!
I don’t really get the critique. Your ranking is so well reasoned and thorough that I’m currently using it as basis for my nerf/buff list for an upcoming campaign. Most other rankings have so much flat out bias compared with yours, and I also love your extended system.
Edit; if someone tried to concentrate on a spell from a pocket dimension I’d flat out tell them they were out of range. Even most infinite range spells can’t target other planes of existence, so I see no reason why a familiar could keep bless on a party from a pocket dimension.
RAW you don't need to be within range of a spell to concentrate on it. You don't even need to be on the same plane.
For instance an enemy wizard can cast Wall of Force on a party and Plane Shift out. Then the would have to wait 10 minutes or cast Disintegrate to get out without a teleport effect.
The problem with the Chronusgist's Abeyance is the same problem I have with the spell Simulacrum, which wizards can get at 13th level, but this is even more op because it basically doubles their action economy and all their spell slots
Handing of a spell bead to your familiar gets worse when you consider the spell flock of familiars. Luckily it's only once per short rest or it would be even more broken. Think dipping 3 lvls of echo knight and having your familiar concentrate on Stinking cloud while you are inside your own resilient sphere (concentrated on by another familiar) (make sure to take the blind fighting style), manifest your echo outside the sphere, while you concentrate on a higher broken spell and attacking in the mean time.
I feel that you should have rated Clerics higher, because I've basically only ever played Clerics and have no idea how other classes feel, so I just feel that Clerics should be the best. 😅 Really, we all have our preferences and opinions, but when it comes to D&D character optimization, I've learned that yours is generally far more informed than most others. I think your rankings are spot on.
Bladesinger is kind of the epitome of "A+". All of its abilities are good/strong, but have limitations, and they mostly make the Bladesinger better in situations that other Wizards might have problems like being in melee or dealing with monsters with magic resistance/high saves/immunities. Nothing that breaks the game but they're super flexible and always good.
RE: multiclassing into wizard. IMO if you want a very potent tier 2-3 martial character it pays to start there then break wizard before level 7. Currently playing a battle smith who multiclassed into war mage. Who needs a fighter/barbarian/paladin?
I usually critique based on your words tbh. Even though I am biased towards rogues and fighters because I've had some good experiences with these, when you say that the mastermind rogue lags behind when compared with other classes that maybe I detest (just a hypothetical example) I'm gonna get a little defensive about it. Don't take it personal, I'm loving this series despite my whining in the comments. Thanks for working so hard on these videos.
classes that you detest?
@@Werelight when compared to other classes that maybe they don't like
@@Werelight as someone who never played a druid, doesn't really like the mechanics, and had lots of people who hogged the spotlight as druids, i can easily say I'm not really a fan. Maybe detest is too strong a word for it.
@@k2k4 I’m fairly bleh on druids, myself. Their aesthetics do nothing for me, summon spells slow down the game, moon druids break the game, I prefer arcane support spells to druid ones…
@@Werelight I'll admit as someone else who likes to play martials: I can get irritated that the wizard, already one of the strongest and most versatile classes in the game, keeps getting more benefits to make them stronger (even just adding a couple extra spells in a supplement can do that, while there's rarely a commensurate benefit for martials), and that under the 5e multiclassing and feat rules it's trivially easy for them to overcome their only real weaknesses early on.
Scribes L6 ability is insanely good if being played by a tactically minded player. Just flat out crazy how good it is.