Caster supremacy

I did this by making Magic spells rare items.

Wizard needs to FIND the spells to use them.

I don't usually like systems like that.

There's the open question of "who developed the spells in the first place?"

Other Wizards far more powefuled and wise than the level 1 Wizard.

I also renamed every single fucking spell in my 5E game to have a name before it.

>Fumbuls Fireball
>Conrads cone of Cold

Because that is exactly what it is, you're learning other people's spells.

What doesn't make sense is Wizards pulling shit out of their ass while roaming around.

>immersion must dictate that casters have a much higher XP requirement to level up.
But D&D Basic did do that. And caster supremacy wasn't nearly as much of a problem. D&D got worse as it went on, news at 11.

Besides, the fighters that you play at AREN'T archetypical fighting men. Those would be people with a NPC class. PC fighters are far beyond the ken of your average human in the game, and can already do impossible shit.

I wish one of these "caster supremacy" threads was about how casters would dominate the world in a literal "caster supremacist" world order.

There has got to be a YA novel about that somewhere.

>What doesn't make sense is Wizards pulling shit out of their ass while roaming around.

Well, it does in part, depending on the underlying 'physics' of magic.

Like certain symbols or gestures or words could be 'resonant' with whatever arcane force, thus enabling anyone to experiment, as in real life.

I mean, physics itself wasn't invented by a preexisting 'master physicist'. That's some Plato's theory of forms cart-before-the-horse stuff.

So you're basically saying Wizards can sit on a rock and think really hard and suddenly they have all the symbols, gestures and components and their required doses simply because he beat enough Goblins over the head?

Sorry buddy, if the Fighter needs to rummage for an extra cool magic sword, you need to rummage for an extra cool magic spell.

Or do Fighters just grow +1 magic swords out of their arms in your setting?

I agree with you entirely. That is how I run my games generally. Spells need to be found during the course of the campaign, and you can pay NPCs to learn spells from them.

>sit on a rock and think really hard
Theory of relativity was Einstein sitting in a chair and thinking.

But I obviously mean that yes, a caster can in the course of using his talents to combat goblins, experiment newly along the paths of his understanding.

It might be a fun system to have casters only develop new spells by electing to take risks to experiment in combat with new techniques.

>Theory of relativity was Einstein sitting in a chair and thinking.

No it wasn't.

It was Einstein doing some complex Mathematics on a chalkboard for hours on end until he formed a theory that stood up to the experiments and the simulations.

Sure, no doubt, Experiment, learn. I don't just let wizards Memorize spells either.

They need to learn the spell from the spellbook by usage, depending on the level.

Because I like the idea of character progress.

The Fighter going from the Young Swordsman to the Heroic Lord of War, able to sweep aside lesser foes and shrug off wounds that would slaughter regular men.

Likewise, the Wizard goes from a freshfaced apprentice scrambling with scrolls to an Aged Magician, All his arcane knowledge locked away within his vast intellect.

>It was Einstein doing some complex Mathematics on a chalkboard for hours

That is not contradictory: It's still an activity of thought as opposed to one of seeking a pre-written answer.
But as said, it will depend on setting choice.

If magic is so cool what sense does it make to have an experienced old wizard as a starting character? You could use a much less powerful apprentice/journeyman who would still be able to rival a fighter instead.

>Spells Gained at a New Level
>Wizards perform a certain amount of spell research between adventures. Each time a character attains a new wizard level, she gains two spells of her choice to add to her spellbook. The two free spells must be of spell levels she can cast. If she has chosen to specialize in a school of magic, one of the two free spells must be from her specialty school.

>Wizard levels up
>Let's assume they did some research out in the middle of bumfuck nowhere.
>Randomly gets two spells out of thin air.

Exactly my point, Spells are basically worth nothing because they're learnt so easily.

Why would you have to be anywhere in particular to research magic?

>>Randomly gets two spells out of thin air.
Do note, you are the one saying that, not necessarily the rules of the game.

Many RPGs specify that the 'level up' process is a game mechanic which represents the sum total of understanding accumulated by the character over the course of their journey.

A wizard could have been researching that Level 3 spell from the beginning.

>I don't think I've ever heard of a caster wanting to be better at hand to hand combat than a fighter.
If you are invulnerable to the sword of your opponent you are the better fighter almost by default. Most of fencing consists of trying not to get killed. Suicidal fighters are a serious pain to deal with because they don't maintain a safe distance but simply go and stab you.
It's not impossible to deal with suicidal fighters, but it is a raised difficulty. Now imagine a fighter who's not just discarding his defense but also not dropping dead when you hit him.
That's a problem.

>Theory of relativity was Einstein sitting in a chair and thinking.
No, it was Einstein sitting in a chair in front of hundreds of papers written by physics experts and trying to make sense of them.
He didn't even manage to make sense of it all in one go.

how about we just have "levels" which denote the power level of a character?

also this kvetching solely applies to 3e and OD&D

>That used to be the case in 2e.

No, not really. The varying level speed system didn't do anything like what was implied, because mages and fighters didn't advance at particularly different speeds.

Thieves advanced faster, but also were essentially useless in and out of combat for a very long time.

The main recipient of faster advancement speeds were druids.

>Casters are stronger than martials, BUT...
insert you pain in the asss here
XP penalty, Perils of Warp, casting costs HP/XP...

Casting costing HP is a great way to get the whole low HP thing of D&D without being as obvious.
Costing XP and Perils are a terrible idea because then it requires the casters to basically be as unhelpful as possible.

Guarantee this thread will have 100+ replies in about half an hour despite something similar being made every day

Since we're shitposting
>The only thing people here ever seem to come up with ITT:

>Make magic take reaaaaalllly long to cast

>make it pointlessly dangerous to cast, yes we get it, 40k psykers are cool, but not every magic system needs to kill the caster for doing their job

>making casting incredibly complicated to the point where no one would want to bother with it, which is probably the point, but makes you wonder why they didn't just ban wizards

>Lots of posters going on about physical changes and other abnormalities for casters, not sure, probably fetishes

>The few that bring up other actual magic systems that work, such as Grups, or RIFTS

>That guy with his special homebrew that makes casting so different than raw for the system it makes you wonder why he bothers using it in the first place.

That everything?

Yep that seem to cover all the bases. Though I would say that "40k psykers are cool thing" is wrong. they are pretty much just cheap ass wild mages with psychic fluff and thats boring.

Perils work if it makes sense in setting, like 40k, but not very well, or at all anywhere else, especially when its some homebrew bull where they obviously don't want casting but don't have the balls to just remove it.

Eh I guess I just think it's neat, at least in setting anyway, and good I've had that pasta for a while.

Medieval books were extremely heavy and vulnerable to water.
If your research is exclusively field research ie blowing stuff up, then sure, you can do that on the course of your adventure.
But if you want to look anything up and it's not in the one 10 pound short book you are carrying in your backpack, then you better head to the next wizards' library and hope they have a copy of the tome you are looking for, or at least an address where you might find one.

The only way to balance magic users is to lower the power of their spells and abilities. It really is that simple.

That's not how levels work, user. Things of the same level should be equivalent, hence the term.

I'm the first person to tell you martials should be equivalent to spellcasters, but implying a person does not gain experience through improvisation and experimentation, given the motivation of not-getting-killed is asinine. They already understand the mechanics, or they wouldn't be manipulating aetherics in the first place.

So, I've got some time to spare.
I play 3.5 with the following rules on leveling up. I dont remeber if they are Core rules, rules from a seperate version, variant rules or whatever, but here they are:

Every character in D&D has to spend time leveling up between adventures.
1 week per Rank
2 weeks per Feat
1 week per (Learned) spell
(Not copied from a spellbook or a scroll)

The Character also has to be trained by someone who already has at least the same number of ranks the character is trying to achieve, the feat he/she is trying to gain.

Training also typically costs gold.
Guilds will train their members for free, but guilds have dues.

I know this raises the question,
>How could anyone gain skills or feats or spells in the first place without being trained?
And to that, I dont have an answer, but I will counter the question with, What skills have you learned, personally, that something (books, videos ect.) or someone did not teach you?

And
>How did the first spellcaster learn his spells?

The way the book says. They learn a set amount per level up through study and experimentation. Then they share/sell these spells to other casters. Either letting them copy it out of their book or making them a scroll. Also commonly overlooked, Wizards can FAIL to copy a spell into their book.

Cont.

This gold/time cost is rather small for fighters, few skill points, a feat, maybe 6-8 weeks?

The time for a rouge? With all those skill points? It makes sense that they can do so much because they spend so much time training.

Spell casters, they take quite a bit of time learning spells, but it doesnt cost them much in terms of gold. The gold cost for them usually comes from attempting to learn spells off of scrolls, other wizards, or creating/buying magic items. Which are nesscesary for a weak little wizard who CAN ONLY USE MAGIC to competently defend themselves.

I dont think casters are ridiculously OP. And I think people who play them give themselves all the spells for power gaming, ignore level up time, and generally break, ignore, or are just plain dont know all the rules of casting.

Also, there is a power curve.

Level 1 fighter vs level 1 Wiz

Fighter wins almost 100% of the time

Level 20 Fighter vs Wiz

Wizard wins almost 100% of the time.

This is a reward for wizards being able to gain so much power.

The martial fighter has a linear power gain, a diagonal line on the graph.

A caster has a curve sloping up slightly at first, but rising rapidly and passing the fighter further down the line.

Putting this image out early.

Wasn't Sun Wukong only capable of leaping half the diameter of the world?

Then the argument of the power of spells vs martial abilities.

The wizard has to prepare what he thinks he will need for each day. Didnt prepare any combat spells? Fucked if you needed them. Didnt prepare any utility spells? Fucked if you needed them. Not strong or skilled enough to do to almost anything without magic. Without 8 full hours of uninterrupted rest, and an additional hour to prepare his spells hes relying on whatever he has left from the previous day. Out of spells for the day and attacked at night? May as well lay down and accept your fate, your 1d4 hit die aint helping you. If you survive you need an additional hour of rest to clear your mind, but your party cant wait that long, they already wait an hour in the morning extra for you, and after last night, we know its not safe here we need to move.

A fighter wakes up polishes his sword, dons his armor and fucks things up, is skilled enough to jump long distances, strong enough to carry gear that would aid him to preform almost any task, and can reasonably fight anything he encounters. Goes to bed and heals up, rinse repeat. If hes attacked at night, still able to fend for himself.

Point is, you all overlook so much stuff when you make these grand sweeping statements.

How about you look at the wizard with all the rules, not just the ones that support your idea that casters are superpowered gods.

>Wasn't Sun Wukong only capable of leaping half the diameter of the world?
This post is amusing to me.
>only leaping half the world
I mean, maybe, but he's still leaping most of the damn world in one somersault.

>Thor
Damn, he even couldn`t wrestle an old hag.
Grappling UP.

Obligatory image

>The few that bring up other actual magic systems that work, such as Gurps, or RIFTS
>Implying the default GURPS magic system doesn't hit several of those shitposts

The default magic system in GURPS has multi-turn times for anything that deals damage and retardedly long times for anything that's not a debuff, most supposedly powerful or useful spells are pointlessly dangerous on a critical failure (some even on regular failures), and is complex by non-GURPS standards. The only thing it doesn't do is that transformation fetish or whatever.

FUCK the default magic system.

This. GURPS has several good and legitimately interesting magic systems, sticking with the default one is almost criminal. Still better than Pathfinder's though.

>How about you look at the wizard with all the rules
I did. Not my fault you introduced stupid houserules that have nothing to do with the game, plus you managed to make CoDzilla the go-to choice as if it wasn't already busted.

You missed his point, I believe.

>I don't want anime fighters

This triggers me.

Fighters will never be as powerful as wizards without going anime. Nothing in western mythology is as powerful as d&d wizards.

The Bartimaeus trilogy is about this.

>Nothing in western mythology is as powerful as d&d wizards.
See

Don't forget making spells less powerful as a default. Like having Fireball be the most powerful attack spell in the world, rather than Meteor Storm.

None of that is as powerful as a d&d wizard.

Oh you can leap over a continent? Wow... I can teleport to anywhere in the multiverse in a nanosecond.

I think the point here is that this other user treats spells like magic items, so that they have equivalent value in the mind of the players.

I like the idea as far as it helps keep wizards from taking their "fair" share of magic items when they don't really need them.

user's not saying the research is bad, he's saying the fact that it's an immediate reward instead of a quest in itself is a problem.

Personally I think it's just a problem with DnD. Fighters aren't exactly spending all their time at combat schools to learn their bonus feats. DnD and systems based on it are full of gamist bullshit that's great fun but shit at immersion.

>Fighter wins almost 100% of the time

First, not a PvP game, so it matters less that a Fighter can kill a Wizard and more that a Wizard can knock out a dozen goblins where a Fighter would get overwhelmed.

Secondly, the Wizard has at least a 50/50 shot. Initiative, attack rolls, and saves are all close to a coin flip that level, so it comes down to whoever lands a solid blow first.

And the odds get even worse for the Fighter if you pick a non-squishy caster like a Druid or Cleric.

The D&D explanation for the level system is just that you're doing all the training in the background.

The game system of 'you get the level instantly' is I believe not the actual function of the underlying RP world. 'Experience' represents your character's literal 'figuring things out' time.

The trouble of spells as magic items is that spells are what define the caster. Without higher level spells, the caster largely isn't a higher level character. While a fighter can use generic weapons, but the levels will greatly enhance them.

Bullshit. A level 1 wizard has multiple spells at his disposal that can compeltely remove the fighter from the fight and allow the wizard to perform a bunch of successive coup de graces.

You're full of shit if you think the fighter wins 100% of the time. Maybe it's not 100% in the wizard's favor, but casters still have overwhelming advantage due to the depth of their mechanics, especially if the player knows what they're doing.

>Fighters will never be as powerful as wizards without going anime. Nothing in western mythology is as powerful as d&d wizards.

This is the thing. It isn't that Fighters can't be amazing. As pointed out they do incredible things without magic.

The problem is that D&D Wizards surpass gods by level 10 and only get stronger from there. Merlin or Circe can't do a fraction of the stuff a high level D&D Wizard can. Odin would probably have trouble matching their sheer versatility.

Caster Superiority is a result of a pure wankfest that gives us wizards who are just a hair short of being totally omnipotent.

And a smashing book at that. Would recommend to anyone who likes the idea of magic being more than wand pointing.

Why are you idiots arguing over this? This isn't a PvP game. There's no competitive element to d&d whatsoever. It's a cooperative game.

Pretty much every single point you've made here is wrong, so I don't know why you even bothered.

The wizard needs to prepare spells, which is a disadvantage at early levels, but not all casters need to and this is about casters vs martials, not wizard vs fighter.

Also wizards can switch their spells out once they know what they're dealing with, if time allows for it. Any good group will investigate and figure out something about the obstacles ahead before venturing forward. The fighter can't switch combat feats.

Also you're pretending wizard spells are super specific and shit. Wizard spells are so versatile, you're only ever in danger of not having one ready at early levels. In pathfinder you get free cantrips, ffs. Talk about utility.

So? What's your point?

Everyone knows what the problem is. The solution is either to nerf casters (which probably won't sit well with players wanting to play casters) or give martials weeaboo fighting magic to compete.

Either that or just play 5e.

Whats the highest level spell we see merlin use? Cause I know Circe uses polymorph a whole fukking lot.

>Combat spells
>Utility spells

Massive overlap there. Stuff like flight and summon monster are great for both in combat use and out of combat utility. Spells exist that are great in both areas.

If you need a combat fallback, a Wand of magic missiles is cheap and better than a crossbow most of the time. Scrolls exist for more specialized spells that aren't often worth preparing due to their rare circumstances, and wands exist for spells that you use often enough to justify having 50 available.

And of course there's spells like Rope trick to give you an easy way to rest 8 hours outside of range for an ambush.

Also, for this part

>A fighter wakes up polishes his sword, dons his armor and fucks things up, is skilled enough to jump long distances, strong enough to carry gear that would aid him to preform almost any task, and can reasonably fight anything he encounters. Goes to bed and heals up, rinse repeat. If hes attacked at night, still able to fend for himself.

If a Fighter is attacked at night, you pointed out yourself that he won't be in armor. If it's magical or heavy armor, that fighter isn't going to be doing much more than the wizard.

Also, by having your fighter skilled enough to jump over those gaps, are you giving up the ability to climb, or the ability to swim?

I agree that spells are the cahracter progression equivalent to a martial's progression in feats and the like. That doesn't change the fact that wizards are overpowered motherfuckers that overshadow martials at all stages of the game.

You could give wizards a single spell every four levels and they'd still be able to tear reality to the core out of sheer variety of choice and the grace of the devs, who don't know how to tie their own shoelaces let alone balance a game.

The issue is that the power-imbalance not only makes martials completely redundant in the manner of Angel-Summoner/BMX-Bandit but that it fucks with the entire point of levels in an RPG: If two player-characters are at the same level, it's logical that they should be equal in power.

>wizards are overpowered motherfuckers that overshadow martials

A useful question is: Why don't you just worship wizards?

I mean seriously. Treat them like Hercules or something. Have one per party, and suckle from the teat of conjuration magic.

Classes will never be balanced. Deal with it. There are too many factors in play.

You've got supplements like the book of nine swords to give martials more tools and bring them up to casters level.

They won't be perfect, but you can certainly make the classes much closer to the ideal. It's just that our friends at Paizo don't even try.

Zero no Tsukaima.
The story is shit, but the worldbuilding is above average.
It's a early modern world where the rulling elite is composed of mages.

Imma say this once, and imma say it again:

Y'all need Mutants and Masterminds 3e. There's even 3.5 conversions of stuff for it. Some git will whine at the "lack of balance", but it allows fun for "martials" and "casters" without adding bookkeeping garbage.

>Classes will never be balanced. Deal with it.

Perfect balance is impossible, yes, but every other edition of D&D is in a far better spot than 3.5.

All it takes is at least getting martials a bit better off than the Barbarian or Rogue, and bringing casters down to the level of Bard or Beguiler.

But no, people will complain if their caster can't do absolutely everything and ruin the game for everyone else.

You can use supplements like weeb fighting magic to buff martials.

We have these threads every fucking day now. What's the point? Either use weeb fighting magic or play a different game.

Because while that can sure be a party dynamic, that's not the people we're playing with, user. The person who picks the caster is going to be a massive cunt about it, and the people who end up the servile little shits are going to complain all the fucking way.

It's not the kind of dynamic you set up from the very start in a popular game that most people pick as their first. You'd have to not only be retarded but also suffering from some kind of affliction that makes you think you're Hitler's reincarnation.

So play something else then. Nobody's forcing you to play 3.5 are they?

Also if you think that nerfing wizards to bard level and further buffing martials is a good idea you're retarded. You don't want balance you want martial domination.

Book of nine swords fixes the caster supremacy issue in 3.5. Look into it.

>You can use supplements like weeb fighting magic to buff martials.
Primarily by introducing classes that make the core martial classes irrelevant, and even with everything else in that book they don't come close to the power of casters. 3.5 is fundamentally broken on the matter of class power-disparity, and nothing short of a complete rebuild of the system could fix it.

If only wizards didn't bugger up so badly with marketing 4e this shit wouldn't be a problem.

That went downhill at the end there.

But in D&D, I believe the design is just that. The wizard is a backline artillery of doom, and fighters are there to protect the backline. They're like carries in DOTA.

40k rp handles power imbalances rather well: one player's the rogue trader, or inquisitor, or warleader, etc. If they're a dick, you don't play with them.

4e is a shot game. Stop blaming it's failure on bad "marketing".

Nine swords goes a long way to fix the disparity or you can just play 5e which is the most balanced DnD has ever been.

>You don't want balance you want martial domination.

Bard is Tier 3. Warblade is Tier 3. Beguiler is Tier 3. Barbarian is Tier 4. Rogue is Tier 4.

>Book of nine swords fixes the caster supremacy issue in 3.5. Look into it.

Helps, doesn't fix. Book of nine swords makes martials competent. It doesn't put them on par with godlike casters.

What's so wrong about not letting certain classes do absolutely everything ever?

>Nobody's forcing you to play 3.5 are they?

No, but so long as people keep making these stupid threads to indicate that they don't understand how the system they love so much works, I'll bring it up.

There's a difference between imperfect class balance in which some classes are better than others at certain stuff, and the current martial/caster disparity.
Why would my party have a fighter if I can have the Wizard use Summon Monster to give us a frontline, or have the Druid's bear act as the Fighter? Instead of having a Fighter you get the exponentially more useful and powerful Druid or Wizard ON TOP of the Fighter's role in combat scenarios.
Which is why people have a problem with the martial/caster dicotomy. Not because of PvP or feeling like they can't beat the other classes in a 1v1, but because if some who doesn't know better plays a Fighter, and someone else picks a caster class with animal companion or a summon spell, the Fighter will quickly feel like they are contributing nothing and grow disillusioned to the game.
And for "higher level play", it means that a handful of the classes in the game are just simply unusable when attempting to create any semblance of an opimally crafted party.

>Stop blaming it's failure on bad "marketing"

Right. The real failure is that it didn't appeal to 3.5 players who get confused when a Fighter can do more than swing a sword and playing a Wizard doesn't let them live out their fantasies of having a succubus harem.

>tier lists

Night this is DnD not Street Fighter. GTFO with that powergaming shit.

You're just beating a dead horse with these threads. Everyone knows casters are more powerful and versatile in 3.5.

You either use supplements like nine swords to correct the issue or you play another game. Simple. No need to make a thread about it for the umpteenth time.

>You either use supplements like nine swords to correct the issue
Except nine swords doesn't fix the issue, that's what everybody's trying to tel you m8.

The martial/caster disparity is not "current". People are talking about shit from 3.5 a game released over a decade ago.

That's not why it failed either retard. It's a shit game. Get it? Shit. Garbage. Worthless. Not fun.

I invite both of you to try 5e. It fixes most of the problems present in 3e without changing the core mechanics of D&D like 4e did.

Veeky Forums LOVES to exaggerate caster supremacy. It's not nearly as bad as you make it out to be.

Nine Swords pretty much fixes it desu.

okay 3.fag

>You're just beating a dead horse with these threads

Then tell that to whoever is making the threads. Otherwise, I'm going to keep calling out retards who think that the Tier system isn't a really straightforwards explanation of how strong certain classes are relative to eachother and that it's somehow only for powergaming.

Because of course grouping classes based on options and then numbering them is only something a minmaxer would do right? Not someone who wants to gauge how broken the game is and ensure all the classes being played can actually compete with one another.

No, better to declare Tiers are for queers and let someone play a Monk alongside a druid.

Has anyone here played Blade of the Iron Throne RPG, or The Riddle of Steel RPG? I was looking through options that fixed this whole argument and this popped up.

Also, someone was discussing a Dark Souls hack of it.

>This is a perfectly viable option in 5e.

The main problem with D&D IMO is that everything is too expensive for Martials while being too cheap for Casters.
A fighter has to buy lots of feats to be able to do relatively simple stuff. He also needs to buy better versions of some feats (weapon mastery/supremacy/whatever) just to keep gaining bonus to be able to hit stuff.
Spells scale as the caster levels up, what means he can expend his limited resources in getting new stuff instead of simply trying to keep his old stuff relevant.
Martials have to buy their vertical power increase (do the same things but better) if they want it to be good, while mages get decent vertical growth out of the box and can buy better vertical power increase and also horizontal power increase (do new things as good or better than the old things you can already do).

Martials have little to none horizontal power increase. Most martial builds are rather fet starved (due to ridiculous feat taxes and long feat chains that force you to buy a lot of useless shit before getting something good), and so you need to specialize in something at the expense of other options. Grapplers are pretty fucked against something they can't grapple, while chargers are fucked against things they can't charge, trippers are useless agains things they can't trip, etc. The think is that the mythlogical and folk heroes who are the inspirations of the concept were much more versatile than that.

But then, calling the the 3.5 fighter a class is making a mockery of the concept of class. The fighter is the bare exqueleton of a class. It has no class features worth anything. No, give more feats/better feats doesn't solve much (people tried it already),

tl;dr: Buying powers out of a list is a better paradigm for powers instead of what martials have. Even moreso when the powers you get at the list scale with your level up.

>Get it? Shit. Garbage. Worthless. Not fun.

Yes, yes, 3.5 is all of those things.

I do play 5e quite regularly. I also quite enjoy 4e, because I'm not someone autistic who thinks that because they ditched vanician spellcasting and added a unified resource system that the game is terrible.

And really, that's all they did. They didn't get rid of crits, or feats, or ability scores, or d20s, or skills, or magic items, or hitpoints, or anything like that. It's perfectly functional as it's own thing. I can understand if you don't like it for not being 'muh d&d', but by that logic every game that isn't D&D is the shittiest shit on the face of the planet for daring to not be a copy of 3.5.

All of that is about 3.5, the only edition of D&D I have experience playing and running.

>Nine Swords pretty much fixes it
Yeah because it makes you a Sword Wizard instead of a Magic Wizard.

Which is why I play 5e you retard. I don't play 3.5 because of people like you who insist that Monk and Druid are totally balanced against eachother and refuse to actually understand the game they're playing.