| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1FallingIcicleJul 10, 2014 12:55:43 | We've seen alot of talk about the mountain dwarf wizard. I'm actually a bit surprised that people have overlooked the hill dwarf. Those extra HPs are really tempting. A hill dwarf that raises his Con up to 20 can have +6 HPs/level, which is amazing for a wizard. A Hill Dwarf that starts with a 16 Con and spends his ability increases on it can have over 100 hp as a wizard by level 10! Sure, AC is helpful, but HPs are even more so. AC doesn't protect you from fireballs and other things that don't have attack rolls. HPs do. Plus, the Hill Dwarf gets a bonus to wisdom instead of a useless bonus to Strength. |
| #2SaelornJul 10, 2014 13:02:35 | Honestly, I'm still trying to get a handle on this whole Hit Point thing. I have so much experience with AD&D and 3E, where the goal of the game was to avoid taking damage because healing is limited, that I can't quite get a feel for how much damage you're supposed to take over the course of an encounter or day.
I mean, if the Cleric can restore 5hp per level with a channel, or you can get 10hp from a potion, then having more max Hit Points doesn't benefit from that, where +AC that makes you less likely to lose those Hit Points in the first place does make that healing go further by making you less likely to need it. That makes sense to me. But then you get all of your Hit Points back with a long rest, so more total Hit Points does translate directly into more healing on that front.
It's just weird. Hit Points are in a weird, completely unintuitive place for me. |
| #3melloredJul 10, 2014 13:02:49 | The +1 HP/level isn't as good as +3 AC / or +1 spell slot the mountain dwarves get. Who also get the +2 Con over other races.
But they still work well enough.
|
| #4KarnosJul 10, 2014 14:16:19 |
It's been beaten to death in the other thread so I am not going to respond further, but I do think Hill dwarf is superior to mountain dwarf for most Wizards in the long run.
The spell slot for Mage Armor is basically a non-issue after a couple levels, when 1st level spells aren't really offering much for an at-level encounter. On the other hand, the extra hp will just get better and better as you level up. The lost spell slot *might* be a noticable thing at level 1-2, but that is a very small amount of time given the fast progression through the low levels.
TBH, I think the races are in a great place, I can see arguments for almost any possible race of Wizard. |
| #5PolarisJul 10, 2014 15:26:26 | What makes the Mtn Dwarf work is the free armor proficiences that enable him to ignore Dex after character creation without loss of defense or survivability. The Hill Dwarf doesn't get this, and an extra +1hp/level while not bad at all simply isn't as desirable for the wizard.
-Polaris |
| #6Person_ManJul 11, 2014 8:54:26 | Like so many things in 5E, it all depends on the method of Attribute generation used, and whether or not Feats are actually worthwhile.
If you roll randomly and get a bunch of high Attributes and/or Feats are not as valuable as the raw bonuses from Attributes, then Hill Dwarf is probably the way to go.
If you use a standard array or point buy and/or Feats are more valuable then raw bonuses from Attributes, then it makes sense to get 14 Dex, 14 Con, highest possible Int, medium armor, and then get as many Feats as you can.
If there's at least one really great Feat for Wizards, then I think Human Wizards will probably end up being the default, and not Dwarf.
Also, I find it humoruous that the "magical" Elf race isn't particular optimal at being a Wizard or Cleric compared to other races. |
| #7KarnosJul 11, 2014 9:37:40 |
|
| #8PolarisJul 11, 2014 9:48:58 |
|
| #9melloredJul 11, 2014 10:00:17 |
|
| #10FallingIcicleJul 11, 2014 11:04:36 |
|
| #11PolarisJul 11, 2014 11:10:01 |
|
| #12FallingIcicleJul 11, 2014 11:30:52 |
|
| #13KarnosJul 11, 2014 11:51:32 |
|
| #14jocanuckJul 11, 2014 12:02:43 |
|
| #15ChimerasameJul 11, 2014 12:38:38 |
|