Who deals more damage over the course of the day? This thread is devoted to the numerical analysis of damage output between these two classes. It mages no judgement on the balance of the classes. Let's get into these n and see what we can find out.
Level 5 Test:
The first test will be a level 5 Evoker Wizard vs a level 5 Archer Fighter. Both excell at combat from a distance so will have a very similar playstyle.
Assumptions: The day is 4 encounters total with 16 rounds of combat. The party has time for a single short rest during the day. The "typical" monster has a 15 AC and a +1 Dex save bonus.
Archer Fighter:
2 attacks per round @ +9 to hit for 1d8+4 damage. 10% crit chance for 2d8+4 damage. With action surge, 18 total attacks over 16 rounds.
=(0.65*(8.5)+0.1*(13))*2*18 = 245.7 total damage per day.
Highest burst is 27.3 DPR
Evoker Wizard:
3 fireballs @ 8d6 (65% full damage, 35% half)
= 24*3.5*0.65+24*3.5*.35*0.5 = 69.3 AoE damage
3 flaming spheres @ 2d6 per round (65% full, 35% half), 8 rounds due to concentration
= 8*7*0.65+8*7*0.35*0.5 = 46.2 single target damage (potential off turn AoE)
3 magic missiles @ 10.5 auto damage
= 3*10.5 = 31.5 damage
Note: A 1st level slot is used on Mage Armor
7 firebolts @ +7 to hit for 2d10 damage. 5% crit chance for 4d10 damage.
= [0.6*11+0.05*22]*7 = 53.9
Total Damage Per Day = 200.9
Highest Burst = 23.1 AoE + 5.775 Flaming Sphere
Note: I only used 8 rounds of flaming sphere because it is a concentration spell and concentration can be broken when you take damage.
The archer can run out of arrows but the wizard will always have cantrips.
pauln6 wrote:
The_Jester wrote:
Wow, wizards suck! ;) I'm still excited to try those AOE spells though 
.
Gnarl wrote:
Thanks for posting the numbers, Lawolf.
Excuse me if I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone was saying the low level wizard did more damage than the fighter. I think the complaint was that the wizard was comically weak at the start, then ridiculously strong at the upper levels (like, 40d6 strong). By the time you hit level 4 or 5, things are starting to even out, even in 3.5; it is at level 1 and 10+ that you really start to see the big differences, no?
Lawolf wrote:
Yeah, AoE could easily do the trick. If each of those fireballs catches two enemies, for instance, the wizard pulls ahead.
But, it's still an interesting comparison. In a 'day' that consists of nothing but dishing out single-target damage, the wizard is only 83% as effective as the fighter.
Also, 5th is solidly in D&D's traditional 'sweet spot,' that narrow range of levels in which basically all editions came pretty close to balancing. At 1st, for instance, it'd be traditional for the fighter to vastly out-perform the wizard in damage/day (assuming you're not resting a day after every encounter, which might've been assuming a lot). Conversely, at high levels, casters traditoinally pulled way ahead.
mellored wrote:
The problem isn't the round-to-round output, it's the alternate win conditions that functionally do infinite damage, and utility spells that bypass the skill system.
Hold Person and Sleep are both ridiculously strong, and dynamic casting + cantrips really means that a Wizard doesn't need to stock more than one, maybe two damage spells. Fill out the rest of your prepared list with Knock, Spider Climb, Passwall, Invisibility, Fly, Teleport. Past level 6 a Wizard has enough spell slots to bring every challenge-nullifying spell that they'll ever need for anything that wasn't contrived purely to thward the Wizard, and the rest is just gravy.
Knock, for example, not only bypasses a skill check, it opens doors that would otherwise require breaking down. The party makes skill checks because the Wizard decides to let them.
mellored wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
I think you did not take into consideration that one of the wizards spells (flaming sphere) is "concentration" and can be disrupted by dealing damage
to the wizard and by any things the DM regards to be distractive.
Wizards said that they incorporated proficiency bonuses into the new saves of monsters. However, it could well be that they also uped the AC of monsters.
So I would say we are treading on thin ice here with any assumptions. Only time will tell.
Comparing the dmge gap at lvl 10 when the fighter gets an additional attack at lvl 11 seems to be a bit unfair.
Edit:
Sorry, did not see your second comparison. Did you add that later?
11 lvl casters get only one lvl 6 spell slot.
The archer will have significantly more hitpoints and better AC, in most situations. If damage was equal, the obvious choice would be the class with the superior survivability, so IMO wizards should do more damage.
In a protracted adventure where the party doesn't have opportunity for a full rest, the archer damage remains at full power while the wizards damage dwindles.
edit: also, the archer has second wind. Don't you remember how incredibly strong that is? We had a 30 page thread about!
DSZ wrote:
@Lawolf: didn't you make a mistake in your math?
At level 5, where does the 2*20 come from? Shouldn't it be 2*16 (2 attacks for 16 rounds) + 2*2 (2 attacks for 2 bonus actions from action surge) for a total of 36 attacks and not 40?
And same at level 11, shouldn't you multiple the damage by 54 and not 60?
Also, disintegrate does not deal 1/2 damage on a miss but 0 damage.
And where did the +12 to hit come from? Isn't it +2 for fighting style, +5 for dex, and +4 for proficiency? For a total of +11 to hit?
Also note that you won't use flaming sphere on the first round of combat against a group of monsters because your high damage AOE attack will have a more benefical impact on the fight. Damage spikes are really that good. So your math really is single target damage comparison.
Some of us do think that Wizards should be more powerful than Fighters. They are after all, Wizards.
There isn't a right or wrong play style. But this thread is premised on the view that the classes should be balanced and treats perceived imbalances as problems. Some of us don't think so and it should be noted.
Gnarl wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
mellored wrote:
mellored wrote:
Karnos wrote:
Nimloh wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Tony_Vargas wrote:
Azzy1974 wrote:
The damage comparison is fun, but ultimately useless. The smart wizard will simply cast hold person and let the party rogue go to critsville on the paralyzed enemies who cannot even act. That is probably the quickest and safest way to deal with any combat encounter.
Nimloh wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Gnarl wrote:
I think there won't be much of a Fighter vs. Wizard debate if the multiclass rules don't limit what Action Surge can do for a Fighter//Wizard.
If I get my action + action surge action + bonus action thats 3 fireballs (*I use it as an example, insert any spell that you can cast) in the first turn of combat.
I really hope they update the PDFs with the multiclass limits soon, things will get interesting if they don't limit it lol.
Nimloh wrote:
Nimloh wrote:
Azzy1974 wrote:
[quote="Lawolf"]
DSZ wrote:
No offense but should it matter how much damage another class does compared to your own? Each class is going to have it's own strengths and weaknesses. High level casters should be more powerful at higher levels then martial classes, the trade off is that they are made of tissue paper. In most cases if a Martial class can survive to get to the spellcaster the spellcaster is in serious trouble
So long as everyone feels like they are contributing: I think that is the sweet spot. One class edging out another one in certain circumstances isn't a big deal. If a Fighter is slightly better than others at making things bleed, I think that's okay. A Wizard "going nova" and shining for a couple of rounds is cool. A Paladin dropping a smite and manhandling a gaggle of demons is totally fine.
Some semblance of balance is important. The crunchy bits shouldn't get lost in the narrative, just as the narrative shouldn't get swallowed up by the mechanics.
without reading this thread I guarantee archer does more single target damage thanks to action surge. aoe dmg is shite compared to single target, its not on the same effective level, because the quicker you focus fire each enemy down, the better. ie doing 60 dmg to one guy and taking him out is much better than 20 dmg to 3 guys.... archer wins, and archer wont even do as much dmg as great weapon fighter, or two weapon fighter. wizards strength in 5e will be save or due and utility, not dmg (similar to 2e). in fact I predict all dpr builds will leverage of action surge, either straight fighter or mc fighter.
Lawolf wrote:
Thunaer wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Daganev wrote:
Azzy1974 wrote:
Thunaer wrote:
What matters however, is that the calculation is principally correct.
Otherwise it suggests not only a different outcome but also a different feel.
So no 6th lvl spell or higher can be regained by arcane recovery.
That is importand for the game IMHO and should thus be taken into consideration.
DSZ wrote:
LFK wrote:
Brimleydower wrote:
Nimloh wrote:
@Gnarl
I did not want to imply that there was any sort of dishonesty in his calculation.
If it came across like that I apologize. Heck, he even made mistakes which provided the fighter with more dmage than is.
I said in an earlier post that there is only one 6th lvl slot for an 11 lvl wizard. which he denied pointing out arcane recovery.
I just informed him that this is wrong because he did a heck lot of calculation there (thank you LW) and I wanted it to be correct.
I was actually responding to the poster who said that numbers are not so importand but feel.
I basically agree. However, not only are there a lot of people around here which disagree but I think
that arcane recovery is such a fundamental part of the game that we should get it right.
I also fully agree with you that Lawolf will fix it asahht (as soon as he has time).
(edited for correction)
DSZ wrote:
Azzy1974 wrote:
Oops, I totally messed up with arcane recovery not being able to recover 6th level spells. I also messed up by only giving the level wizard 15 rounds of combat instead of 16. I have updated the post to have the wizard use arcane recovery to recover two additional fireballs.
The net effect of this was that the wizards single target damage actually increased slightly and increased their AoE damage significantly.
P.S. Looking at the numbers for the high level wizard, it seems like casting flaming sphere is not all that useful. Using those level 2 slots on utility spells may be the better way to go. Since the level 11 wizard has his 4th level slots available, improved invisibility might be a good use for a concentration spell making the wizard much more surrvivable than the fighter. Afterall, you can't hit what you can't see!
@Lawolf: I was wondering, why did you use 16 rounds? Is it guess work or did you estimate this by using the amount of healing available in the game?
Lawolf wrote:
There's another error in the wizard side of the rundown. The +5 INT bonus damage at level 11 only applies to evocation spells, so disintegrate and flaming sphere don't get that.
Nimloh wrote:
One fix that I'm considering after reading the thread.
Fighter feature
Martial Proficiency: Add your proficiency bonus to all weapon damage roles.
Too much? Not enough (assuming all you want is a damage advantage)?
With the number of attacks fighters get, any static damage bonus is going to stack up fast. In Lawolf's calculations, even a +1 bow or misc +2 damage bonus would make quite a difference for the fighter making 36 attacks in a given 'day.'
mestewart3 wrote:
mestewart3 wrote:
I'd like to see what 17th level looks like. If Fighter and Wizard are marginally balanced for single target damage, then I'll be less worried about the system; Wizards are less defensive, they can deal more damage in my book. Any defense a Wizard gains from spells will eat into their damage, and their utility will eat into it as well. All in all, Wizard design is good design because every time they blow a spell to do what the other classes do, they get weaker. I only wish groups didn't stop to rest when the Wizard ran out of spells.
mellored wrote:
Dracones wrote:
Here's another scenario. In this case the wizard is using firebolt except in 8 cases where he can AE down targets using evocation spells with sculpting. Given that 3rd level fireballs can sculpt 4 targets, a wizard can pretty much point blank AE evocation spells and not hit any friendlies.
This rotation assumes 1 chain lightning against 4 targets, 2 cone of colds vs 3 targets, 2 4th level fireballs vs 3 targets and 3 3rd level fireballs vs 3 targets. That's 8 AE spells with the remaining 8 rounds using firebolts vs a single target.
1x 6th slot chain lightning, evoc, 10d8 against 4 total targets
50*.65 + 50*.35*.5 = 32.5 + 8.75 = 41.25 * 4 = 165
3x 3rd level fireballs, 8d6 evoc, against 3 targets
33*.65 + 33*.35*.5 = 21.45 + 5.775 = 27.225 * 3 = 81.675 * 3 = 245.025
2x 4th level fireball, 9d6 evoc, against 3 targets
36.5*.65 + 36.5*.35*.5 = 23.725 + 6.3875 = 30.1125 * 3 = 90.3375 * 2 = 180.675
2x 5th level cone of cold, 8d8 evoc, against 3 targets
41*.65 + 41*.35*.5 = 26.65 + 7.175 = 33.825 * 3 = 101.475 * 2 = 202.95
8 firebolts @ +9 to hit for 3d10+5 damage. 5% crit chance for 6d10+5 damage.
0.6 * 21.5 + 0.05 * 38 = 12.9 + 1.9 = 14.8 * 8 = 118.4
Totals
165 + 245.025 + 180.675 + 202.95 + 118.4 = 912.05
The problem with that comparison is that older editions used different XP charts, so that weaker fighters and thieves leveled up much faster than more powerful classes. That's not been the case since 3e, though, so in an edition that uses a single XP chart (like 5e), the disparity in power between characters becomes a rather large issue.
I don't see recovered action surge in the calcs either. If the wizard uses at least one short rest for arcane recovery then the archer would get at least one more action surge for that same rest. That's a significant increase on 4 encounters 4 round each. Based on the criteria the fighter would have 2+ action surges. I think it's also worth comparing other combat styles.
Ashrym wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Ashrym wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
aw4e wrote:
I updated the numbers a bit. The level 11 wizard uses primarily AoE spells (11 of their 16 turns are devoted to AoE attacks). This reduces the wizards single target damage a little, but as fights in D&D rarely feature just a single enemy, this spell usage is more optimal overall. By level 11, the wizard has all of his level 1 and 2 spell slots freed up for utility or defensive spells such as invisibiliy, mage armor, knock, silence, hold person, levitate, charm person, and shield. While using primarily AoE spells, the level 11 wizard does better single target damage than the fighter.
Note: I am guessing (hoping?) feats and magic items will be more beneficial to weapon users than spellcasters. On the other hand, it would be nice for magic items to affect all classes equally.
Nice update. One thing I like about it is that it's easy to tweak the numbers for 2 or 3 average targets per spell just by removing the firebolt, multiplying the remainder and adding firebolt damage back in.
I don't think it'd be unrealistic for the 11th level wizard to be clearing close to 1k total damage on a good day. It's really going to depend on how the monsters work. With bounded accuracy will GMs be throwing a lot of lower CR monsters at the players or will they be sticking to higher CR single monsters.
Lawolf wrote:
Tony_Vargas wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Tony_Vargas wrote:
LFK wrote:
Tony_Vargas wrote:
Hurin88 wrote:
This issue underlines the basic problem with full casters compared to everyone else.
Full casters have a range of options that deal lots of damage, can do to all enemies within an area of effect, can impose status effects on enemies, can buff themselves and allies, can solve a variety of exploration and roleplaying challenges, and can do many other things. In theory there's a limit on the number of times per day that they can do these things, but these limits are easily bypassed by their own class abilities, or if need be by taking a Long Rests whenever you run out.
Everyone else deals roughly equivilent or inferior damage, to no more then 1-5 enemies per round, and have few or no options for imposing status effects, and their ability to overcome exploration and roleplaying challenges is limited to the Skill system, which everyone has access to. (So while a Rogue might be 20% more effective at Skill challenges, a Wizard can basically bypass it entirely).
So at level 11 the single target damage of wizard and archer are pretty close, but this is because fighters get a third attack at 11. From levels 7-10 the wizard deals more damage. As the wizard levels he continues to gain more spell slots, higher level spells, and more damage increasing class features.
By level 14, the wizard has access to level 7 spells, can arcane recovery a 4th and a 3rd level spell, can over channel a 5th level spell, and over channel every cantrip. The fighter has gained nothing that improves his damage.
By level 17 the wizard has access to level 8 and 9 spells, can arcane recovery a 5th and a 4th level spell, and has an additional 10 damage on his overchanneled cantrips. The fighter now crits on 18-20 and can action surge twice between rests.
The fighter doesn't catch up damage wise until level 20, but even then I am not sure if it will be enough. Meteor swarm at 40d6 damage simply puts the fighter's damage per day back too far. Combined with overchanneled cantrips dealing 45 damage each cast and a full suite of powerful spells, it looks pretty grim.
Lawolf wrote:
I wouldn't assume you can overchannel cantrips without taking damage. We're going to need some feedback from the 5e team on that ability because the combination seems like a loophole.
But wizards aren't picking up a lot of spell slots as they age into their teens and while their DPR is going up, it's doing so slowly until they hit meteor swarm. Fighters and rogues are picking up defensive abilities which keeps them more conistently in the fight to do damage. A wizard's damage goes to 0 when he botches a save or suck Wis roll while the fighter can just roll through it with indomitable and keep swinging.
Dracones wrote:
Rastapopoulos wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Karnos wrote:
Rastapopoulos wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Person_Man wrote:
Person_Man wrote:
Note: I purposefully left feats and magic items out of the equation because we don't know what the final versions might look like. And while a +2 bow certainly ups the damage of the fighter, a rod of arcane might that increases spell DCs by 2 and adds +2 damage per die to arcane spells is definitely not out of the question.
Hopefully feats and magic items affect all classes equally. After all, we are told both are completely optional and that for feats, a player who chooses none is just as good as one who takes a few. The best way to ensure balance is to have classes be balanced both with and without feats/magic items.
I seriously doubt the designers came anywhere near that lofty goal of theirs, but I will hold them at their word until it is proven otherwise. For now, assume any effect from feats or magic items affects both classes in equal measure.
Tony_Vargas wrote:
Karnos wrote:
Titanium_Dragon wrote:
Dracones wrote:
Sleep shouldn't be an OP spell. 5d8 is 22.5 average damage while burning hands is 17.3 vs 2 targets(26 vs 3). Sleep doesn't damage partially, it's all the HP or nothing, and can't be sculpted. Meanwhile an evoker can sculpt out 2 friendly targets from burning hands keeping it viable even if your fighter and rogue are in the middle of things.
Titanium_Dragon wrote:
Heh its like people see vancian spells and fall aprt after the perfection of 4E lol. 3rd ed was the one where casters were out of whack, maybe at the highest levels in OSR type D&D but no one really plays those levels anyway so its not like you would notice in most games.
Rastapopoulos wrote:
Great post and great thread. A lot of people are starting to acknowledge that only time will reveal where the actual class balance lies. I applaud this unbiased analysis!
Zardnaar wrote:
Some other numbers for level 11 fighters.
Halfling luck and shortbow(I'm thinking luck is just a 5% DPS increase, someone tell me if I'm wrong)
(0.65*(8.5)+0.1*(12))*3*18*1.05 = 381.3075
Greatsword and GWF:
(0.55*13.3333 + 0.1*21.6666)*3*18 = 513 total damage
+1 greatsword:
(0.60*14.3333 + 0.1*22.6666)*3*18 = 586.8
+1 greatsword and 50% bless uptime:
(0.60*14.3333 + 0.1*22.6666)*3*9 + (0.725*14.3333 + 0.1*22.6666)*3*9 = 608.175
Sleep isn't the auto-win that people think it is. It's not like dealing 5d8 no-save damage.
First, it looses alot of it's potential to "rounding errors". If you roll a 24 on your sleep, and there's 2 targets with 15 hit points, you really only did 15 "damage". The other 9 points are lost. The larger the monsters, the more likely the waste.
And second, crit's won't make up for the damage you could of otherwise done. And it's not like you can crit it 4 times. 3d4+3 damage from a magic missile is more then the extra 2d6 dealt by a crit, and after 1 crit it wakes up. Plus magic missile won't "fail" because you rolled low.
Even at later level, giving the crit to a rogue who will deal 11d6 bonus crit damage, your only dealing 1/2 what a finger of death can do.
Now, it's still a top spell, having a monster skip his turn is very valuble. But it's not really any more encounter ending then plenty of other wizard spells.
mellored wrote:
Against humanoid opponents, Hold Person is the dominant spell. Not only does the target lose their action, but they do so for a few rounds potentially. On top of that it nearly triples the average damage of each party member you have because attacking a paralyzed attacker is an automatic critical and the attack is made with advantage.
Lawolf wrote:
Ashrym wrote:
Caliburn101. wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Dracones wrote:
Yeah, rogue archers feel pretty weak to me right now. Getting in more sneak attemts is sort of everything. Sword and board fighters are doing pretty well if they take duelist, though it's odd to me they do more damage than archers when they get +2 AC out of it.
I really want to see the feats and magic items at this point. Fighters get 2 more feats than everyone else so it's sort of a class feature. A +1 here, extra arrow there, etc would add up pretty quick.
We don't know what magic items or feats will look like for casters though. It isn't unreasonable to assume that there exists a rod, staff, or wand that gives spellcasters +1 to their save DCs and +1 damage per damage die of their spells which would parallel the benefits of a fighter's +1 magic sword. It is not unreasonable to expect "metamagic" like feats similar to 3e or other feats that enhance spellcasting. Who really knows what 5e will give us in terms of items and feats.
Again though, we were told that magic items are entirely optional. As such, classes should be balanced in their absence. We were also told that feats are balanced with ability increases, so the classes should be perfectly balanced if neither takes a single feat.
I don't actually believe them when they say these things, but that is what we are told. Only time will tell how well things hold up with magic items and feats.
So for those who want to know how great weapon fighters fare, here is the last level that a great weapon fighter out-damages the wizard against a single enemy only over the course of a day. Level 9!
Assumptions: The day is 4 encounters total with 16 rounds of combat. The party has time for a single short rest during the day, giving the fighter two uses of action surge, and allowing the wizard to regain a 3rd and 2nd level spell. Because the fighter is a melee character, he has 2 rounds per day where he must use a thrown weapon. The "typical" monster has a 16 AC and a +2 Dex save bonus. Both Wizard and Fighter have a 20 prime stat. Fighter uses a greatsword with Great Weapon Style.
Fighter Damage Per Day
=(0.6*(13.33)+0.1*(21.66))*2*16=325.2
=(0.6*(8.5)+0.1*(12))*2=25.2
Total = 350.4
Wizard Damage Per Day
1 one of cold @8d8 (70% full, 30% half)
=((8*4.5)*0.7+(8*4.5)*0.3*0.5)*2=30.6
3 fireballs @9d6 ((70% full, 30% half)
=((9*3.5)*0.7+(9*3.5)*0.3*0.5)*3=80.3
4 fireballs @8d6 (70% full, 30% half)
=((8*3.5)*0.7+(8*3.5)*0.3*0.5)*4=95.2
4 flaming spheres @2d6 (70% full, 30% half) with 12 rounds uptime
=12*(7*0.7+7*0.3*0.5)=71.4
4 firebolts @2d10
=(0.65*16.5+0.05*33)*8=49.5
Total = 327
At level 9, the fighter does 7% more damage than the wizard to a single target only. Of course, many of the wizard spells chosen are AoE spells which means that if there are 2 or more enemies, the wizard will do more total damage. The wizard also has better burst, can attack from the safety of range, and does not have to worry about disadvantage.
I posted in the other thread but I wanted to post this correction here as well.
your math is off for the 9th level GWF fighter.
Hit Rate = (21-(16-5-4))/20 = 70% - Crit Rate (10%) = Hits 60% of the time Crits 10% of the time
Hit Damge = (8.333+5)*.60 = 8.000
Crit Damage = (8.333+8.333+5)*.1 = 2.167
ADPA = 10.167
DPR (2 Attacks) = 20.333
Damage over 16 rounds with 1 short rest is
18(16 rounds and 2 action surges) *20.333 = 365.994
The envoker is off as well. The save should be only 25% of the time. You are also using the +2 dex when a con save is called for (cone of cold) and do not spell this out in your methodology. I will leave it to you to fix the math as I don't agree with modeling wizards this way.
For people wandering into this thread late I would point out that if he wizard in the above level 9 comparison casts haste on the warrior instead of a fireball we get up to 10 rounds of an extra 10.167 average damage or up to 101.67 damage over 10 rounds. This is compared to a fireball of ((8*3.5)*0.75+(8*3.5)*0.25*0.5)=24.5. Even if we limit this to just 4 rounds it is still an average of 40.668 damage compared to 24.5.
Modeling two melee classes can work. But modeling a class that provides buffs in a vacuum is silly. Even more silly if we then compare him to the very class he should be buffing.
Sifaka wrote:
Lawolf wrote: