I've been thinking a lot more about the Mislead spell and the debate over Invisibility in recent years. I had a chat with one of my players and dove back into the rulebook. It left me convinced that passive skill checks should be much more involved when detecting Illusion magic. I've personally been trying to use passive skill checks more at my table to cut down on requesting rolls. Mislead is really confusing because everyone is conditioned at most tables to roll a lot. The designers likely (i.e. hopefully) assume when creating these types of spells that the DM would make more use of passive ability DCs.

Invisibility is notorious for being a poorly written spell. The language in the spell's description is so vague that it's probably the most unintentionally houseruled spell in the game. Learning how to properly utilize it requires making use of passive skill checks.

First... what does the Invisibility spell actually do?

The Invisibility spell grants the invisible condition by applying the concealed effect to a creature. The creature remains under the concealed effect until the spell ends.

But isn't that the same as taking the Hide action?

No. The Invisibility spell does not make a creature hidden. However, both the Invisibility spell and taking the Hide action grant the concealed effect.

Ok... so when is a creature hidden? What is the concealed effect?

A creature can take the Hide action to gain the concealed effect by becoming hidden. Successfully taking the Hide action requires 1) being outside the observer's line of sight and 2) making a Stealth check (DC 15) while either being heavily obscured or having three quarters or full cover. Successfully taking this action grants the creature the concealed effect which applies the invisible condition. The creature is now hidden.

The Invisibility spell does not automatically make a creature Hidden because it has not taken the Hide action. The Invisibility spell instead applies the concealed effect automatically to give a creature the invisible condition.

Now that we know the difference, let's break it down.

• the invisible condition prevents a creature from being perceived by sight (with exceptions)
• the concealed effect grants a creature the invisible condition
• a creature can gain the concealed effect by casting the Invisibility spell on itself or taking the Hide action

Casting the Invisibility spell or successfully using taking the Hide action grants a creature the invisible condition because both apply the concealed effect to the creature.

Time to compare magical vs. non-magical invisibility. The keyword to pay attention to here is creature. The Invisibility spell, the invisible condition, the Hide action, and the concealed effect all only apply to perception checks made against the creature by sight. They do not apply to sound created by the creature.

A non-magically invisible creature loses the concealed effect when it is no longer hidden. It is no longer hidden when any of the following occur: when perceived or detected either through sight or sound ("louder than a whisper"), or leaving cover/obscurement.

A magically invisible creature always has the concealed effect active unless it is seen (by Truesight, Blindsight, or a similar effect) or the spell ends. This means that a magically invisible creature retains the concealed effect even when it is perceived or detected through sound.]

Here's where passive skill checks come into play when using the Invisibility spell.

An observer may take the Search action to detect creatures or objects that are hidden (including a creature with the concealed effect active) by utilizing perception. Although a magically invisible creature remains concealed from sight while moving, the sound of its movement is not concealed because the concealed effect only applies to the creature.

A magically invisible creature must make a Stealth check without advantage when attempting to move if it wants its movement to not be detected (i.e. perceived) by an observer. The magically invisible creature would make this check against the observer's Passive Perception DC to conceal its movement from detection. If the creature is successful, the observer does not detect that the creature has moved unless it somehow becomes visible to the observer. However, even if the creature fails to conceal its movement, it still remains concealed from the observer's sight. The observer would not know the creature's new location. It would only know that the creature moved and the direction of the creature's movement. If a creature conceals its movement while remaining invisible to the observer, then the observer cannot perceive the creature or its location without first detecting that it has moved.

All of this means that an observer using perception to locate a magically invisible creature must 1) rely on its Passive perception to detect that the creature has moved and 2) utilize the Search action on its turn to perform a Perception check. The observer would make the perception check at disadvantage against the invisible creature's most recent stealth roll if the check against the observer's Passive perception was a success. However, even if the observer makes a successful Perception check with the Search action to detect a magically invisible creature, it can only perceive its current location based on its most recent movement. The observer can perceive the creature but it still can't see it as long as the Invisibility spell is active (maintaining the concealed effect).

[Note: A hidden, non-magically invisible creature can move while remaining hidden only if the creature remains concealed while moving. It would still need to roll a Stealth check without advantage against the observer's Passive Perception DC when attempting to move to conceal its movement from detection and then take the Hide action again to maintain the concealed effect at the end of its turn.]

Now let's discuss the Mislead spell and why knowing all this almost makes it coherent.

A creature casting Mislead would still need to make a successful Stealth check against the observer's Passive Perception DC if it moves after creating the duplicate.

Simple, right? Well, here's were it gets technical: if the creature fails the Stealth check, the observer detects movement... but from what? where? The observer still has to reconcile what it hears with the illusion that it can see. The observer should have to resolve this before choosing his next course of action. Seeing through an illusion usually requires an Intelligence (Investigation) check. However... (just like the Invisibility spell) there's no language for this in the Mislead spell's description. Ok, so let's resolve this using a passive Investigation check. Well, monsters in the MM don't have passive Investigation listed in their stat blocks. This leads me to believe that the spell is mainly for DM use.

Yes. You can easily calculate (or assign) a Passive Investigation DC for a monster. But it's more fun for the player if the creature rolls a raw contested Intelligence check against a Deception or Arcana roll made by the player to determine if the duplicate is convincing enough to conceal the player's movement from detection. If the monster succeeds at both rolls, it sees through the illusion, knows that the player has moved, AND knows the direction of the player's movement. If the monster fails the Intelligence roll, it still hasn't detected that the creature has moved. It should then either interact with the duplicate or take the Study action on its turn to determine if the duplicate is an illusion.

So... Mislead is actually decent spell for a player to cast when fleeing (especially from multiple enemies) since it can compensate for a failed Stealth check to ensure their movement is undetected. It's just a huge pain to adjudicate because of the unclear language, the number of conditions involved, how they interact, understanding what checks are triggered, and determining the source of the triggers.

I've been thinking a lot more about the Mislead spell and the debate over Invisibility in recent years. I had a chat with one of my players and dove back into the rulebook. It left me convinced that passive skill checks should be much more involved when detecting Illusion magic. I've personally been trying to use passive skill checks more at my table to cut down on requesting rolls. Mislead is really confusing because everyone is conditioned at most tables to roll a lot. The designers likely (i.e. hopefully) assume when creating these types of spells that the DM would make more use of passive ability DCs. 

Invisibility is notorious for being a poorly written spell. It only makes sense when you start to consider the purpose of passive skill checks. How I believe Invisibility is meant to work: after casting the spell, the creature becomes concealed. It is not hidden.

Being Hidden requires 1) being outside the observer's line of sight 2) and making a Stealth check (DC 15) while either being heavily obscured or having three quarters or full cover. This is why you can be "Invisible" but not "Hidden." However, casting Invisibility or becoming Hidden both grant the Invisible condition because the creature is concealed. 

An observer cannot see a concealed creature, but it can *detect* its location by using **perception**. It cannot learn the location of a concealed creature without perceiving it. An invisible creature is always concealed unless it is seen, but a concealed creature can be perceived without losing the invisible condition.

Edit:

[A non-magically invisible creature loses the concealed effect when any of the following occur: when perceived or detected either through sight or sound ("louder than a whisper"), leaving cover, or losing obscurement.

A magically invisible creature is always concealed unless it is seen (by Truesight, Blindsight, or a similar effect) or the spell ends. It can be detected or perceived by sound without losing the invisible condition.]

The Search action is used to detect creatures or objects that are hidden (this includes something that is concealed), but the observer can't see an invisible creature unless it loses the concealed effect. A magically invisible creature remains unseen (concealed from sight) while moving but the sound of its movement is not concealed. The creature must make a Stealth check without advantage to avoid its movement from being detected. (i.e. perceived).

Here's where passive skill checks come into play. The magically invisible creature would make the Stealth check against the observer's Passive Perception DC to conceal its movement from detection. If the creature is successful, the observer does not detect that the creature has moved unless it somehow becomes visible to the observer. However, even if the creature fails to conceal its movement, it still remains concealed from the observer's sight. The observer would not know the creature's new location. It would only know that the creature moved and the direction of the creature's movement. If a creature conceals its movement while remaining invisible to the observer, then the observer cannot perceive the creature or its location without first detecting that it has moved. 

All of this means that an observer relying only on perception to locate a magically invisible creature must 1) detect that the creature has moved and 2) utilize the Search action and perform a Perception check at disadvantage against the invisible creature's most recent stealth roll to conceal its movement even if the creature isn't hidden. But remember: the creature is still concealed by magical invisibility. It can not be seen by the observer unless the invisible condition is removed. An observer that makes a successful Perception check with the Search action to detect a magically invisible creature can only detect its current location based on its most recent movement. It can perceive the creature, but it can't see it as long as the Invisibility spell is active.

Now, let's go back to Mislead. The invisible creature would still need to make a successful Stealth check against the observer's passive Perception if it moves after creating the duplicate. So far, simple. Here's were it gets technical: if the creature fails the Stealth check, the observer detects movement. But from what? It still has to reconcile with the illusion. However, monsters don't have passive Investigation listed. This leads me to believe that the spell is mainly for DM use.

You can calculate Passive Intelligence for a monster observer rather easily, but it's more fun if the creature rolls an Investigation check using its Intelligence modifier against the creature (player's) Deception to determine if the duplicate is convincing enough to conceal the invisible creature's movement. If the observer succeeds at both rolls, it sees through the illusion, knows that the invisible creature has moved, AND knows the direction of its movement. If it fails the Investigation roll, it still hasn't detected that the creature has moved. It must then either interact with the duplicate or take the Study action to make another Intelligence check on its turn to determine if the duplicate is an illusion.

So... Mislead is actually pretty decent if you need to flee immediately (especially from multiple enemies) after turning invisible because it makes your movement harder to track. It's just a huge pain to adjudicate because of all the conditions involved, what checks are triggered, and the source of the triggers.

PLANESCAPE: MASOUE OF THE MAROUIS

You're nobody. Evervone you trusted has turned their backs on you. Y our luck ran out years ago You`ve just spent the last of your dignity and nearly every bit of copper you could spare on a vague promise and a shot in the dark.

The letter arrives the day before you re about to skip town. No return address. Just a time, a place a promise for the chance at one last score. One big enough to erase every mistake you've ever made. The letter is signed by a ghost. A name only whispered in the darkest alleys and the backrooms of taverns. They call him The Marquis.

Congratulations. You've just received your passport to the multiverse. On the other side waits Sigil: "The City of Doors." A ring filled with fog and blades floating above an infinite spire at the center of everything. There are portals here that lead to heaven, hell... and worse. You know none of this. You just want to get paid.

Soon, you'll be building an interplanar criminal syndicate from nothing. Hopping through portals Pulling heists. Running rackets. Buying muscle. Leaving berks in the deadbook

Every Faction and rival gang wants you kneeling or dead... and above them all sits Shemeshka the Marauder. The Queen of the Crosstrade. She owns this city's secrets. It's only a matter of time unti she knows yours.

NO script. NO chosen ones. Your only enemies are anyone you can't bribe, con, or bargain with to stay out of your way. Just five desperate souls making their own way in a multiverse that does not care. Some say the multiverse has a place for everyone. Time to steal yours.

What awaits you:

• Meet the Marquis and master "the game" • Build a criminal empire from a single safehouse into a power that even the Factions fear • Battle for turf and influence with rival gangs in the City of Doors • Portal hop across planes of pure law, chaos and everything in between Negotiate with powerful fiends, fey, mages, and monsters... or rob them all blind • Even the odds,chase your dreams, and tell YOUR story • Assemble a crew, manage businesses and fronts, negotiate partnerships, and build infamy Explore the multiverse, unravel its mysteries, and steal everything that isn't nailed down

**Application and Interview Required**

Message me for more details.

I’d like to know if this seems appropriately balanced for a challenging “mage hunter” themed campaign constructed exclusively for martial PCs starting at LVL 6. It would not stack with any player species that possesses innate magical resistances. It would instead replace those features. I decided to make this based on the unique disadvantages faced by an adventuring party with no full casters.

The only classes permitted for this campaign are Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue, Barbarian, and Monk.

The campaign will heavily feature enemy magic users and monsters with spells and other magical effects. Players will start with two uncommon magic items each (they can’t have duplicates unless its armor, a weapon, or a spell focus). Hit Dice will be pooled. I typically make (at minimum) small adjustments to make my monsters more challenging.

The Chaos Imp

Each PC is bonded to a “friendly” Chaos Imp that can warp reality around them to alter probability. The Imp’s jynx magic makes it harder for enemy spells to harm the PC and assists them with out-of-combat encounters and exploration.

"Imp Points" and "Imp Dice"

Players have a total number of Imp Points (IPs) equal to their Proficiency Bonus (PB). The amount Imp Die (ID) a player has may not exceed this number.

A player with at least one IP may choose to roll with advantage (ADV) on any INT, WIS, and CHA saving throws or skill checks.

• Success: The player loses 1 IP.
• Failure: The player gains 1 ID (1d6) and no IPs are expended.

A player regains a number of IPs equal to half their PB (rounded down for a minimum of 1) after a Short Rest. All IPs are restored following a Long Rest. All IDs are lost following a Long Rest.

How to use Imp Dice

• A player may expend one ID per roll.
• An ID may be rolled once per turn following the result of a saving throw or skill check by adding the result to the total (no action required).
• May be rolled as a reaction following an ally’s failed saving throw or skill check.
• A player may expend up to 1 ID and 1 IP on their turn to roll a STR, DEX, or CON saving throw or skill check against a magical effect with ADV.
• Once rolled, the ID is expended.

Chaos Gambits

Once per turn, a player may expend an ID to make a Chaos Gambit (CG) before attempting a saving throw or skill check (no action required). Making a CG requires the following conditions:

• The player must have at least 1 ID and 1 IP
• The player must roll the ID before rolling the D20 to resolve the saving throw or skill check
• The player must forgo rolling the saving throw or skill check with ADV (this may not be modified in any way)

CG Outcomes

• Success: the ID is not expended and the player gains 1 IP (up to a maximum that does not exceed their PB).
• Failure: the player expends 1 IP and triggers a Wild Magic Surge.

For a while now, I've been doing a deep dive into the two best spellcaster subclasses for single target damage spellcaster: Draconic Sorcerer and Evocation Wizard. Single-target blaster damage, while flashy, often isn't the most effective strategy in a real game. Multi-target damage, powerful AOEs, and control are all better (especially control builds). This analysis is really just to highlight why measurable consistency under pressure beats bigger numbers. The most egregious example of this is the often repeated fallacy that Evocation Wizard is a better single-target blaster than a Draconic Sorcerer.

Specifically, I wanted to look at the notorious damage output of a Level 10 Evocation Wizard using Conjure Minor Elementals (CME). On paper, its numbers are astronomical. But being the "best blaster" isn't just about having the best numbers on a spreadsheet; it's about delivering that damage reliably in chaotic, tactical combat.

This post represents the culmination of that analysis. The goal is twofold: first, to identify the absolute most optimal single-target CME Wizard build by finding the one that minimizes the gap between "White Room" math and "Tactical Reality." Second, to pit that optimized Wizard against a highly-tuned Level 10 Draconic Sorcerer to see which build holds up best under pressure. It's worth noting up front that the Evocation Wizard doesn't even get its flat +4 damage bonus until level 10, double the time of the Draconicr Sorcerer and around the time most campaigns end. We're already starting off with two massive strikes against the Wizard, but let's dig deeper.

Build Choice Notes & Caveats

Before the analysis kicks off, some notes on the build choices and assumptions baked into every number below:

• All attacks are Scorching Ray unless noted otherwise.

- Every scenario runs three rounds, because the average combat lasts 2-3 rounds.

- The "optimal" Draconic Sorcerer single-target damage build used here has the following: Hex, Empowered Spell, Distant Spell (extends the casting range of Hex), Elven Accuracy, Lucky (mitigates any chance of dropping Hex), and Innate Sorcery active every round. Assume all "Pre-Cast Hex" Sorcerers use a spell slot to have Hex up before combat starts, but would cast it innately if they lose concentration between rounds.

- The Sorcerer can cast Hex either with a spell slot or innately via a species trait.

- You can get both Hex and Elven Accuracy as a monoclass Sorcerer by Level 4 with Shadowmoor Elf (ShElf). ShElfs and the other Lorwyn species are official WotC D&D content, but your DM may disagree. YMMV. A ShElf with Fey Touched can cast Hex innately twice per day without a spell slot, making it ideal for this use case. Otherwise, you'll have to wait until Level 8 for Fey Touched (unless your DM allows Eberron Dragonmark feats, then Hunter's Mark is up for grabs early too). Do I recommend running this build over a Chromatic Orb Sorcerer or AOE Evo Wizard? Lol, no.

- Yes. I know. Concentrating on Hex at Level 10 is dumb. So is using your concentration on CME or anything else that isn't a control spell. Please do not waste your energy arguing this point. You're preaching to the choir.

- Yes, this analysis takes into account that the Sorcerer requires using a bonus action to activate Innate Sorcery on Round 1.

- Something I left out of the data: Quicken Spell Firebolt/Sorcerous Burst. I ran some numbers using these early in the process and it definitely has an impact, but it's also a big resource dump and annoying to account for. I decided to abandon them.

- There's an Eberron feat that can give Sorcerer CME, but I'm going to bother with it.

The Setup: The Core Rules of Tactical Reality

All the following "Tactical Reality" simulations factor in the messy realities of a real D&D combat. It accounts for the Wizard's 15-foot CME range and its defensive difficult terrain aura. It accounts for the Sorcerer's ability to attack from 90 feet, but needing to enter 60 feet for Hex if not using Metamagic. Enemies have a +6 attack modifier and a 66 percent chance to attack twice. The Wizard faces a 20 percent chance of an "impossible" DC of 24 or higher on any concentration check. Finally, it uses an intelligent tactical AI for the Wizard that will risk Opportunity Attacks to escape melee rather than lose a turn Disengaging.

Part 1: Optimizing the Wizard Minimizing the Variance

If the goal is to build a reliable CME Wizard that performs as close to its theoretical math as possible, we need to find the build with the lowest "Variance" between its White Room potential and its Tactical Reality output.

**Chart 1: Pre-Cast CME Scenarios** *(the Wizard casts CME before combat begins, attacking 5 times per round for 3 rounds)*

Wizard Build Configuration	Tactical Reality (EV)	"White Room" Math (EV)	Variance
Build 1 (+6 Save w/ Adv, +8 Atk)	314.14	321.75	-2.4%
Build 2 (+6 Save No Adv, Ele Adept, +8 Atk)	307.95	332.25	-7.3%
Build 3 (+3 Save w/ Adv, Ele Adept, +8 Atk)	311.53	332.25	-6.2%
Build 4 (+6 Save No Adv, Reroll 3, +7 Atk)	309.94	334.35	-7.3%
Build 5 (+3 Save No Adv, Ele Adept + Reroll 3, +7 Atk)	310.12	344.40	-9.9%
Build 6 (+3 Save w/ Adv, Reroll 3, +7 Atk)	313.53	334.35	-6.2%

**Chart 2: Delayed Start Scenarios** *(the Wizard must cast CME on Round 1, dealing 0 damage, before attacking 5 times on Rounds 2 and 3)*

Wizard Build Configuration	Tactical Reality (EV)	"White Room" Math (EV)	Variance
Build 1 (+6 Save w/ Adv, +8 Atk)	206.96	214.50	-3.5%
Build 2 (+6 Save No Adv, Ele Adept, +8 Atk)	197.20	221.50	-11.0%
Build 3 (+3 Save w/ Adv, Ele Adept, +8 Atk)	200.78	221.50	-9.4%
Build 4 (+6 Save No Adv, Reroll 3, +7 Atk)	198.49	222.90	-10.9%
Build 5 (+3 Save No Adv, Ele Adept + Reroll 3, +7 Atk)	195.32	229.60	-14.9%
Build 6 (+3 Save w/ Adv, Reroll 3, +7 Atk)	202.08	222.90	-9.3%

The data is clear. By bumping the attacks up to five per round, the value of maintaining concentration skyrockets. Build 1 becomes the undisputed champion across both charts. By investing heavily in defense with a +6 CON save and Advantage, it achieves a staggering 96.43 percent concentration keep rate. Because its base damage is multiplied across 5 attacks per round, keeping that buff active yields more total damage than sacrificing defenses for reroll feats.

Part 2: The Baseline Showdown

Now we take our most reliable build, Wizard 1, and pit it against the Draconic Sorcerer variants. For this initial showdown, we are standardizing both characters to perform exactly five attacks per round across all active turns.

**Chart 3: The Head-to-Head Baseline Comparison (5 Attacks Each)**

Character Build & Strategy	Tactical Reality (EV)	"White Room" Math (EV)	Variance
CME Evo Wizard (Pre-Cast CME / Build #1 / 5 Attacks)	314.14	321.75	-2.4%
Draconic Sorcerer (Pre-Cast Hex / WITH Distant Spell & Elven Accuracy / 5 Attacks)	213.51	213.51	0.0%
Draconic Sorcerer (Pre-Cast Hex / 60ft / WITH Lucky & Elven Accuracy / 5 Attacks)	212.55	213.51	-0.4%
CME Evo Wizard (Delayed Start / Build #1 / 5 Attacks)	206.96	214.50	-3.5%
Draconic Sorcerer (Pre-Cast Hex / 60ft / NO Lucky / WITH Elven Accuracy / 5 Attacks)	201.53	213.51	-5.6%
Draconic Sorcerer (Delayed Hex / 60ft / WITH Elven Accuracy / 5 Attacks)	181.82	193.79	-6.2%
Draconic Sorcerer (No Hex / WITH Elven Accuracy / 5 Attacks)	154.35	154.35	0.0%

When both characters get 5 attacks per round, the Wizard's higher damage dice strictly overpower the Sorcerer. The Pre-Cast CME Wizard boasts a colossal 314.14 tactical damage output, and even a Delayed Start Wizard is competitive. However, the Sorcerer's math is rock-solid. A Distant Spell Sorcerer delivers a guaranteed 213.51 damage with exactly zero variance, taking zero concentration checks throughout the fight.

Part 3: The Nova Round Showdown

To push the limits, we are introducing a "Nova" comparison. The Sorcerer gets to perform six attacks for two of its rounds, and five attacks in its third round. The Wizard gets to perform six attacks for one of its rounds, and five attacks for its other rounds.

**Chart 4: The Head-to-Head Nova Comparison (Wizard Attacks WITH Advantage)**

Character Build & Strategy	Tactical Reality (EV)	"White Room" Math (EV)	Variance
CME Evo Wizard (Pre-Cast CME / Build #1 / 6-5-5 Attacks)	334.81	342.42	-2.2%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Pre-Cast Hex / WITH Distant Spell & Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	237.17	237.17	0.0%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Pre-Cast Hex / 60ft / WITH Lucky & Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	236.46	237.17	-0.3%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Pre-Cast Hex / 60ft / NO Lucky / WITH Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	227.25	237.17	-4.2%
CME Evo Wizard (Delayed Start / Build #1 / 0-6-5 Attacks)	226.82	235.17	-3.5%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Delayed Hex / 60ft / WITH Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	204.57	213.51	-4.2%
Draconic Sorcerer (No Hex / WITH Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	170.13	170.13	0.0%

**Chart 4b (NEW): The Nova Comparison WITHOUT Wizard Advantage**

The Wizard numbers so far has assumed the Wizard attacks with advantage on every single attack, all fight long (2d20 per attack). That is a generous assumption. It requires a reliable, action-free source of advantage every round. This chart re-runs the Nova comparison with the Wizard rolling straight d20s (+8 vs AC 15: 70% total hit chance, 5% crit, 65% normal hit). The Sorcerer rows are unchanged, since Elven Accuracy is baked into that build.

Character Build & Strategy	Tactical Reality (EV)	"White Room" Math (EV)	Variance
CME Evo Wizard (Pre-Cast CME / Build #1 / NO Advantage / 6-5-5 Attacks)	252.33	258.00	-2.2%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Pre-Cast Hex / WITH Distant Spell & Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	237.17	237.17	0.0%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Pre-Cast Hex / 60ft / WITH Lucky & Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	236.46	237.17	-0.3%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Pre-Cast Hex / 60ft / NO Lucky / WITH Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	227.25	237.17	-4.2%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Delayed Hex / 60ft / WITH Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	204.57	213.51	-4.2%
CME Evo Wizard (Delayed Start / Build #1 / NO Advantage / 0-6-5 Attacks)	170.91	177.13	-3.5%
Draconic Sorcerer (No Hex / WITH Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	170.13	170.13	0.0%

The takeaway here is striking. Losing advantage strips roughly 25 percent off the Wizard's output across the board (the expected damage multiplier per attack falls from 1.0075 to 0.75, a factor of 0.744). The Pre-Cast CME Wizard still clings to the top spot at 252.33, but its lead over the zero-risk Distant Spell Sorcerer collapses from nearly 98 points to about 15. More dramatically, the Delayed Start Wizard without advantage plummets from the middle of the pack to dead last among the buffed builds, landing at 170.91, statistically tied with a Sorcerer who never casts Hex at all (170.13). Advantage generation is not a nice-to-have for this build; it is a third mandatory pillar alongside the pre-cast and the concentration investment.

Showing the Work: The Math Behind the Nova

To understand how these numbers are generated, we have to look at the expected damage of each attack and how it scales with the 5-attack baseline and the Nova rounds.

For the Wizard with a +8 modifier and 2d20 Advantage against AC 15, they have an 81.25 percent normal hit chance and a 9.75 percent crit chance. When buffed with CME (3d8 plus 2d6), the expected damage per attack is 20.65 damage. Across a standard 5-attack round with the flat +4 bonus, this is 107.25 damage per round. For the Nova round with 6 attacks, this scales to 127.92 damage. Unbuffed with 2d6, the standard 5-attack round deals 39.26 damage, and the 6-attack Nova deals 46.32 damage.

For the Wizard **without** advantage (Chart 4b), the single d20 at +8 against AC 15 hits on a 7 or better: a 65 percent normal hit chance and a 5 percent crit chance, for an expected damage multiplier of 0.75 per attack. Buffed with 3d8 plus 2d6 (20.5 average dice), the expected damage per attack is 15.375. A standard 5-attack round with the flat +4 bonus is therefore 80.88 damage (5 x 15.375 + 4), and the 6-attack Nova round is 96.25 damage (6 x 15.375 + 4). Unbuffed, the rounds are 30.25 and 35.50 respectively.

For the Sorcerer with a +9 modifier and 3d20 Elven Accuracy against AC 15, they have an 84.18 percent normal hit chance and a 14.26 percent crit chance. With Hex active (3d6), the expected damage per attack is 11.83 damage. Across a standard 5-attack round with their 12 expected bonus damage from flat bonuses and rerolls, this is 71.17 damage per round. For the Nova rounds with 6 attacks, this scales to 83.00 damage. Without Hex (2d6), the standard 5-attack round deals 51.45 damage, and the 6-attack no-Hex Nova deals 59.34 damage.

The "White Room" math simply adds these rounds together. For the Wizard Pre-Cast CME Baseline (5 attacks per round), three rounds of 107.25 equals 321.75. For the Wizard Pre-Cast CME Nova, one round of 127.92 plus two rounds of 107.25 equals 342.42. For the no-advantage Wizard Pre-Cast CME Nova, one round of 96.25 plus two rounds of 80.88 equals 258.00, and the no-advantage Delayed Nova is 96.25 plus 80.88, or 177.13. For the Sorcerer Pre-Cast Hex Baseline (5 attacks per round), three rounds of 71.17 equals 213.51. For the Sorcerer Pre-Cast Hex Nova, two rounds of 83.00 plus one round of 71.17 equals 237.17.

To find the Tactical Reality, we apply the attrition rates based on their defenses. The Wizard takes roughly 0.31 hits per round due to its difficult terrain aura. Build 1 has a 96.43 percent chance to keep concentration. Multiplying the base damage by these branching keep-and-drop probabilities slowly chips away at the Wizard's total, pulling the 342.42 theoretical Nova max down to 334.81. For Chart 4b, note that removing advantage on attack rolls does not change the Wizard's concentration defenses at all. The hit rate against the Wizard, the save bonus, and the keep rate are identical. The expected damage lost to a concentration drop scales exactly with the per-attack dice differential between the buffed and unbuffed states (13.60 with advantage versus 10.125 without, a factor of 0.744), so the 7.61-point tactical loss on the Pre-Cast CME Nova becomes 5.67 points (258.00 down to 252.33) and the 8.35-point loss on the Delayed Nova becomes 6.22 points (177.13 down to 170.91). The variance percentages barely move, because both the loss and the total scale down together. The Sorcerer using Distant Spell operates from 90 feet and takes zero hits, meaning its 237.17 mathematical total is guaranteed to happen in reality. The Sorcerer at 60 feet takes 0.20 hits per round, facing a 6.4 percent drop chance without Lucky, which pulls its 237.17 theoretical max down to 227.25.

Part 4: The Spellfire Flare Variant

A natural follow-up question: what happens if the Wizard swaps Scorching Ray (2d6 per ray) for Spellfire Flare. It's a level 1 Evocation spell dealing 2d10 radiant per blast, the target gets no benefit from Half or Three-Quarters Cover, and upcasting adds one blast per slot level above 1st.

The hit math doesn't change at all. It's the same +8 ranged spell attack. So, only the base dice move, from 7 average to 11 average per hit. Buffed per-attack damage climbs from 20.65 to 24.68 (3d8 CME rider + 2d10). And here's a neat wrinkle: the Tactical Reality loss is *identical in absolute terms* (7.61 / 7.54 / 8.35 points), because what a concentration drop costs you is the CME rider, which is the same 3d8 per attack no matter what base spell delivers it. That means the variance percentages actually *improve* slightly.

**Chart 5a: Spellfire Flare, Straight Swap (same attack counts as Charts 3/4 hypothetical, see below)**

Wizard Scenario	Tactical Reality (EV)	"White Room" Math (EV)	Variance
Pre-Cast CME / Spellfire Flare / 5-5-5	374.65	382.26	-2.0%
Pre-Cast CME / Spellfire Flare / 6-5-5 Nova	399.33	406.94	-1.9%
Delayed Start / Spellfire Flare / 0-5-5	247.30	254.84	-3.0%
Delayed Start / Spellfire Flare / 0-6-5 Nova	271.17	279.52	-3.0%

Before anyone gets excited about that 399: **most of Chart 5a is illegal at Level 10.** Scorching Ray produces slot-level-plus-one rays (4th-level slot = 5 rays, 5th = 6 rays). Spellfire Flare produces only slot-level blasts (5th-level slot = 5 blasts), so a 6-blast round requires a 6th-level slot that a Level 10 character does not have, and a 5-5-5 line requires three 5th-level slots when you only have two. The best you can legally do:

**Chart 5b: Spellfire Flare, Legal Lines at Level 10 (Pre-Cast CME)**

Wizard Line	Tactical Reality (EV)	"White Room" Math (EV)	Attack-slot cost
Best legal Spellfire Flare: 5-5-4	349.97	357.57	Both 5th-level slots + one 4th
Equal slots to the SR Nova: 5-4-4	325.28	332.89	One 5th-level slot + two 4ths
*Reference: Scorching Ray Nova 6-5-5*	*334.81*	*342.42*	*One 5th-level slot + two 4ths*

The verdict cuts against the bigger dice. Slot-for-slot, **Scorching Ray wins under CME** (334.81 vs 325.28), because the 3d8-per-hit rider is worth roughly 13.6 expected damage per attack far more than Spellfire Flare's ~4-point dice edge — so attacks-per-slot dominates raw die size. Spellfire Flare only pulls ahead (349.97) by burning strictly more high-level slots, and even then it caps well below the hypothetical 399 in Chart 5a. The math paragraph for the curious: per-attack buffed damage is 24.5 x 1.0075 = 24.68, making a 5-blast round 5 x24.68 + 4 = 127.42, a 4-blast round 102.74, and a (hypothetical) 6-blast round 152.10; the tactical figures apply the same 7.61-point concentration-loss delta as the Scorching Ray lines, which is marginally conservative for the 5-5-4 and 5-4-4 lines since their later rounds contain fewer attacks to lose.

Two real advantages don't show up in these numbers, though. Radiant is a much better damage type than fire against typical resistances, and ignoring cover is a genuine Tactical Reality benefit the sim doesn't price in. And one genuinely useful flip: *without* the CME rider, Spellfire Flare wins per slot (an unbuffed 5-blast round deals 59.41 vs Scorching Ray's 39.26), which makes it the better fallback spell for the rounds after a concentration drop.

Final Insights & Grand Conclusion

This entire analytical journey confirms a few core truths about D&D builds.

The CME Wizard's damage potential is a textbook glass cannon. To function, it demands a massive investment in defensive feats, requires a pre-cast buff, and is still vulnerable to tactical attrition. Without these supports, its damage collapses. Chart 4b adds a third dependency to that list: consistent advantage generation. Strip it away and the build's headline number falls by a quarter, and the more realistic Delayed Start scenario drops all the way to the level of a Sorcerer with no Hex at all.

The Draconic Sorcerer is a fortress. Its kit is inherently synergistic, combining extreme range, high AC, and unparalleled accuracy into a self-sufficient and reliable damage platform. Its "White Room" math is its reality because its primary strategy is to avoid ever being in a position to fail.

If a player is willing to dedicate their entire build to supporting a single, high-risk spell and their DM allows them to consistently pre-cast it, the CME Evocation Wizard will absolutely produce higher single-target damage. But this confirms the core thesis. The Wizard has to make two big feat investments to protect its concentration, takes nearly twice as long in-game to come online, and needs ideal conditions to achieve this output. The Sorcerer achieves excellent, reliable (sometimes superior) damage with far greater flexibility, fewer resources, and more safety. The reliability of the Sorcerer makes it the superior single-target blaster, and it further proves that chasing the highest number on a spreadsheet often leads to a build that is, in practice, heavily overrated.

For a while now, I've been doing a deep dive into two single target blaster builds. It's well-known that single-target blaster damage, while flashy, isn't often an effective or efficient strategy when approached from a cost/benefit analysis. Blaster builds focused on multi-target damage or powerful AOE control are much better. Control builds beat them both by a mile. We're not here to debate those facts. So, if you're here to argue about that then you're in the wrong place. This analysis is mostly an examination of why CME is overrated for these specific types of builds, and also why EVO Wizard isn't even actually the ideal subclass for a single target damage build.

Specifically, I wanted to look at the notorious damage output of a Level 10 Evocation Wizard using Conjure Minor Elementals (CME). On paper, its numbers are astronomical. But being the "best blaster" isn't just about having the best numbers on a spreadsheet; it's about delivering that damage reliably in chaotic, tactical combat.

This post represents the culmination of that analysis. The goal is twofold: first, to identify the absolute most optimal CME Wizard build by finding the one that minimizes the gap between "White Room" math and "Tactical Reality." Second, to pit that optimized Wizard against a highly-tuned Level 10 Draconic Sorcerer to see which build holds up best under pressure. It's also worth noting that the Evocation Wizard doesn't even get its flat +4 damage bonus until level 10, meaning this comparison is looking at the Wizard when it first truly comes online... which happens to be right around the time most campaigns end.

Build Choice Notes & Caveats

Before the analysis kicks off, some notes on the build choices and assumptions baked into every number below:

- All attacks are Scorching Ray unless noted otherwise.

-Every scenario runs three rounds, because the average combat lasts 2-3 rounds.

- The "optimal" Draconic Sorcerer single-target damage build used here has the following: Hex, Empowered Spell, Distant Spell (extends the casting range of Hex), Elven Accuracy, Lucky (mitigates any chance of dropping Hex), and Innate Sorcery active every round. Assume all "Pre-Cast Hex" Sorcerers use a spell slot to have Hex up before combat starts, but would cast it innately if they lose concentration between rounds.

- The Sorcerer can cast Hex either with a spell slot or innately via a species trait. You can get both Hex and Elven Accuracy as a monoclass Sorcerer by Level 4 with Shadowmoor Elf (ShElf). ShElfs and the other Lorwyn species are official WotC D&D content, but your DM may disagree. YMMV. A ShElf with Fey Touched can cast Hex innately twice per day without a spell slot, making it ideal for this use case. Otherwise, you'll have to wait until Level 8 for Fey Touched (unless your DM allows Eberron Dragonmark feats, then Hunter's Mark is up for grabs early too). Do I recommend running this build over a Chromatic Orb Sorcerer or AOE Evo Wizard? Lol, no.

- Yes. I know. Concentrating on Hex at Level 10 is dumb. So is using your concentration on CME or anything else that isn't a control spell. Please do not waste your energy arguing this point. You're preaching to the choir.

- Yes, this analysis takes into account that the Sorcerer requires using a bonus action to activate Innate Sorcery on Round 1.

- Something I left out of the data: Quicken Spell Firebolt/Sorcerous Burst. I ran some numbers using these early in the process and it definitely has an impact, but it's also a big resource dump and annoying to account for. I decided to abandon them.

The Setup: The Core Rules of Tactical Reality

All the following "Tactical Reality" simulations factor in the messy realities of a real D&D combat. It accounts for the Wizard's 15-foot CME range and its defensive difficult terrain aura. It accounts for the Sorcerer's ability to attack from 90 feet, but needing to enter 60 feet for Hex if not using Metamagic. Enemies have a +6 attack modifier and a 66 percent chance to attack twice which falls relatively in line with how many in the Monster Manual have multiattack. Finally, it uses an intelligent tactical simulation data to account for the chance a Wizard will be compelled to an risk Opportunity Attack(s) to escape melee rather than lose a turn Disengaging. The Wizard's AC is 20 (Mage Armor + Shield). The Sorcerer's is 23 (Shield + Unarmored Defense). Target enemy AC is 15.

Part 1: Optimizing the Wizard Minimizing the Variance

If the goal is to build a reliable CME Wizard that performs as close to its theoretical math as possible, we need to find the build with the lowest "Variance" between its White Room potential and its Tactical Reality output.

**Chart 1: Pre-Cast CME Scenarios** *(the Wizard casts CME before combat begins, attacking 5 times per round for 3 rounds)*

Wizard Build Configuration	Tactical Reality (EV)	"White Room" Math (EV)	Variance
Build 1 (+6 Save w/ Adv, +8 Atk)	314.14	321.75	-2.4%
Build 2 (+6 Save No Adv, Ele Adept, +8 Atk)	307.95	332.25	-7.3%
Build 3 (+3 Save w/ Adv, Ele Adept, +8 Atk)	311.53	332.25	-6.2%
Build 4 (+6 Save No Adv, Reroll 3, +7 Atk)	309.94	334.35	-7.3%
Build 5 (+3 Save No Adv, Ele Adept + Reroll 3, +7 Atk)	310.12	344.40	-9.9%
Build 6 (+3 Save w/ Adv, Reroll 3, +7 Atk)	313.53	334.35	-6.2%

**Chart 2: Delayed Start Scenarios** *(the Wizard must cast CME on Round 1, dealing 0 damage, before attacking 5 times on Rounds 2 and 3)*

Wizard Build Configuration	Tactical Reality (EV)	"White Room" Math (EV)	Variance
Build 1 (+6 Save w/ Adv, +8 Atk)	206.96	214.50	-3.5%
Build 2 (+6 Save No Adv, Ele Adept, +8 Atk)	197.20	221.50	-11.0%
Build 3 (+3 Save w/ Adv, Ele Adept, +8 Atk)	200.78	221.50	-9.4%
Build 4 (+6 Save No Adv, Reroll 3, +7 Atk)	198.49	222.90	-10.9%
Build 5 (+3 Save No Adv, Ele Adept + Reroll 3, +7 Atk)	195.32	229.60	-14.9%
Build 6 (+3 Save w/ Adv, Reroll 3, +7 Atk)	202.08	222.90	-9.3%

The data is clear. By bumping the attacks up to five per round, the value of maintaining concentration skyrockets. Build 1 becomes the undisputed champion across both charts. By investing heavily in defense with a +6 CON save and Advantage, it achieves a staggering 96.43 percent concentration keep rate. Because its base damage is multiplied across 5 attacks per round, keeping that buff active yields more total damage than sacrificing defenses for reroll feats.

Part 2: The Baseline Showdown

Now we take our most reliable build, Wizard 1, and pit it against the Draconic Sorcerer variants. For this initial showdown, we are standardizing both characters to perform exactly five attacks per round across all active turns.

**Chart 3: The Head-to-Head Baseline Comparison (5 Attacks Each)**

Character Build & Strategy	Tactical Reality (EV)	"White Room" Math (EV)	Variance
CME Evo Wizard (Pre-Cast CME / Build #1 / 5 Attacks)	314.14	321.75	-2.4%
Draconic Sorcerer (Pre-Cast Hex / WITH Distant Spell & Elven Accuracy / 5 Attacks)	213.51	213.51	0.0%
Draconic Sorcerer (Pre-Cast Hex / 60ft / WITH Lucky & Elven Accuracy / 5 Attacks)	212.55	213.51	-0.4%
CME Evo Wizard (Delayed Start / Build #1 / 5 Attacks)	206.96	214.50	-3.5%
Draconic Sorcerer (Pre-Cast Hex / 60ft / NO Lucky / WITH Elven Accuracy / 5 Attacks)	201.53	213.51	-5.6%
Draconic Sorcerer (Delayed Hex / 60ft / WITH Elven Accuracy / 5 Attacks)	181.82	193.79	-6.2%
Draconic Sorcerer (No Hex / WITH Elven Accuracy / 5 Attacks)	154.35	154.35	0.0%

When both characters get 5 attacks per round, the Wizard's higher damage dice strictly overpower the Sorcerer. The Pre-Cast CME Wizard boasts a colossal 314.14 tactical damage output, and even a Delayed Start Wizard is competitive. However, the Sorcerer's math is rock-solid. A Distant Spell Sorcerer delivers a guaranteed 213.51 damage with exactly zero variance, taking zero concentration checks throughout the fight.

Part 3: The Nova Round Showdown

To push the limits, we are introducing a "Nova" comparison. The Sorcerer gets to perform six attacks for two of its rounds, and five attacks in its third round. The Wizard gets to perform six attacks for one of its rounds, and five attacks for its other rounds.

**Chart 4: The Head-to-Head Nova Comparison (Wizard Attacks WITH Advantage)**

Character Build & Strategy	Tactical Reality (EV)	"White Room" Math (EV)	Variance
CME Evo Wizard (Pre-Cast CME / Build #1 / 6-5-5 Attacks)	334.81	342.42	-2.2%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Pre-Cast Hex / WITH Distant Spell & Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	237.17	237.17	0.0%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Pre-Cast Hex / 60ft / WITH Lucky & Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	236.46	237.17	-0.3%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Pre-Cast Hex / 60ft / NO Lucky / WITH Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	227.25	237.17	-4.2%
CME Evo Wizard (Delayed Start / Build #1 / 0-6-5 Attacks)	226.82	235.17	-3.5%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Delayed Hex / 60ft / WITH Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	204.57	213.51	-4.2%
Draconic Sorcerer (No Hex / WITH Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	170.13	170.13	0.0%

**Chart 4b (NEW): The Nova Comparison WITHOUT Wizard Advantage**

This assumes the Wizard attacks with advantage on every single attack, all fight long (2d20 per attack). That is a generous assumption. It requires a reliable, action-free source of advantage every round. This chart re-runs the Nova comparison with the Wizard rolling straight d20s (+8 vs AC 15: 70% total hit chance, 5% crit, 65% normal hit). The Sorcerer rows are unchanged, since Elven Accuracy is baked into that build.

Character Build & Strategy	Tactical Reality (EV)	"White Room" Math (EV)	Variance
CME Evo Wizard (Pre-Cast CME / Build #1 / NO Advantage / 6-5-5 Attacks)	252.33	258.00	-2.2%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Pre-Cast Hex / WITH Distant Spell & Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	237.17	237.17	0.0%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Pre-Cast Hex / 60ft / WITH Lucky & Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	236.46	237.17	-0.3%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Pre-Cast Hex / 60ft / NO Lucky / WITH Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	227.25	237.17	-4.2%
Draconic Sorcerer (Nova / Delayed Hex / 60ft / WITH Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	204.57	213.51	-4.2%
CME Evo Wizard (Delayed Start / Build #1 / NO Advantage / 0-6-5 Attacks)	170.91	177.13	-3.5%
Draconic Sorcerer (No Hex / WITH Elven Accuracy / 6-6-5)	170.13	170.13	0.0%

The takeaway here is striking. Losing advantage strips roughly 25 percent off the Wizard's output across the board (the expected damage multiplier per attack falls from 1.0075 to 0.75, a factor of 0.744). The Pre-Cast CME Wizard still clings to the top spot at 252.33, but its lead over the zero-risk Distant Spell Sorcerer collapses from nearly 98 points to about 15. More dramatically, the Delayed Start Wizard without advantage plummets from the middle of the pack to dead last among the buffed builds, landing at 170.91, statistically tied with a Sorcerer who never casts Hex at all (170.13). Advantage generation is not a nice-to-have for this build; it is a third mandatory pillar alongside the pre-cast and the concentration investment.

Showing the Work: The Math Behind the Nova

To understand how these numbers are generated, we have to look at the expected damage of each attack and how it scales with the 5-attack baseline and the Nova rounds.

For the Wizard with a +8 modifier and 2d20 Advantage against AC 15, they have an 81.25 percent normal hit chance and a 9.75 percent crit chance. When buffed with CME (3d8 plus 2d6), the expected damage per attack is 20.65 damage. Across a standard 5-attack round with the flat +4 bonus, this is 107.25 damage per round. For the Nova round with 6 attacks, this scales to 127.92 damage. Unbuffed with 2d6, the standard 5-attack round deals 39.26 damage, and the 6-attack Nova deals 46.32 damage.

For the Wizard **without** advantage (Chart 4b), the single d20 at +8 against AC 15 hits on a 7 or better: a 65 percent normal hit chance and a 5 percent crit chance, for an expected damage multiplier of 0.75 per attack. Buffed with 3d8 plus 2d6 (20.5 average dice), the expected damage per attack is 15.375. A standard 5-attack round with the flat +4 bonus is therefore 80.88 damage (5 x 15.375 + 4), and the 6-attack Nova round is 96.25 damage (6 x 15.375 + 4). Unbuffed, the rounds are 30.25 and 35.50 respectively.

For the Sorcerer with a +9 modifier and 3d20 Elven Accuracy against AC 15, they have an 84.18 percent normal hit chance and a 14.26 percent crit chance. With Hex active (3d6), the expected damage per attack is 11.83 damage. Across a standard 5-attack round with their 12 expected bonus damage from flat bonuses and rerolls, this is 71.17 damage per round. For the Nova rounds with 6 attacks, this scales to 83.00 damage. Without Hex (2d6), the standard 5-attack round deals 51.45 damage, and the 6-attack no-Hex Nova deals 59.34 damage.

The "White Room" math simply adds these rounds together. For the Wizard Pre-Cast CME Baseline (5 attacks per round), three rounds of 107.25 equals 321.75. For the Wizard Pre-Cast CME Nova, one round of 127.92 plus two rounds of 107.25 equals 342.42. For the no-advantage Wizard Pre-Cast CME Nova, one round of 96.25 plus two rounds of 80.88 equals 258.00, and the no-advantage Delayed Nova is 96.25 plus 80.88, or 177.13. For the Sorcerer Pre-Cast Hex Baseline (5 attacks per round), three rounds of 71.17 equals 213.51. For the Sorcerer Pre-Cast Hex Nova, two rounds of 83.00 plus one round of 71.17 equals 237.17.

To find the Tactical Reality, we apply the attrition rates based on their defenses. The Wizard takes roughly 0.31 hits per round due to its difficult terrain aura. Build 1 has a 96.43 percent chance to keep concentration. Multiplying the base damage by these branching keep-and-drop probabilities slowly chips away at the Wizard's total, pulling the 342.42 theoretical Nova max down to 334.81. For Chart 4b, note that removing advantage on attack rolls does not change the Wizard's concentration defenses at all — the hit rate against the Wizard, the save bonus, and the keep rate are identical. The expected damage lost to a concentration drop scales exactly with the per-attack dice differential between the buffed and unbuffed states (13.60 with advantage versus 10.125 without, a factor of 0.744), so the 7.61-point tactical loss on the Pre-Cast CME Nova becomes 5.67 points (258.00 down to 252.33) and the 8.35-point loss on the Delayed Nova becomes 6.22 points (177.13 down to 170.91). The variance percentages barely move, because both the loss and the total scale down together. The Sorcerer using Distant Spell operates from 90 feet and takes zero hits, meaning its 237.17 mathematical total is guaranteed to happen in reality. The Sorcerer at 60 feet takes 0.20 hits per round, facing a 6.4 percent drop chance without Lucky, which pulls its 237.17 theoretical max down to 227.25.

Part 4: The Spellfire Flare Variant

A natural follow-up question: what happens if the Wizard swaps Scorching Ray (2d6 per ray) for Spellfire Flare (Forgotten Realms: Heroes of Faerûn)? It's a level 1 Evocation spell dealing 2d10 radiant per blast, the target gets no benefit from Half or Three-Quarters Cover, and upcasting adds one blast per slot level above 1st.

The hit math doesn't change at all. It's the same +8 ranged spell attack. So, only the base dice move, from 7 average to 11 average per hit. Buffed per-attack damage climbs from 20.65 to 24.68 (3d8 CME rider + 2d10). And here's a neat wrinkle: the Tactical Reality loss is *identical in absolute terms* (7.61 / 7.54 / 8.35 points), because what a concentration drop costs you is the CME rider, which is the same 3d8 per attack no matter what base spell delivers it. That means the variance percentages actually *improve* slightly.

**Chart 5a: Spellfire Flare, Straight Swap (same attack counts as Charts 3/4 — hypothetical, see below)**

Wizard Scenario	Tactical Reality (EV)	"White Room" Math (EV)	Variance
Pre-Cast CME / Spellfire Flare / 5-5-5	374.65	382.26	-2.0%
Pre-Cast CME / Spellfire Flare / 6-5-5 Nova	399.33	406.94	-1.9%
Delayed Start / Spellfire Flare / 0-5-5	247.30	254.84	-3.0%
Delayed Start / Spellfire Flare / 0-6-5 Nova	271.17	279.52	-3.0%

Before anyone gets excited about that 399: **most of Chart 5a is illegal at Level 10.** Scorching Ray produces slot-level-plus-one rays (4th-level slot = 5 rays, 5th = 6 rays). Spellfire Flare produces only slot-level blasts (5th-level slot = 5 blasts), so a 6-blast round requires a 6th-level slot that a Level 10 character does not have, and a 5-5-5 line requires three 5th-level slots when you only have two. The best you can legally do:

**Chart 5b: Spellfire Flare, Legal Lines at Level 10 (Pre-Cast CME)**

Wizard Line	Tactical Reality (EV)	"White Room" Math (EV)	Attack-slot cost
Best legal Spellfire Flare: 5-5-4	349.97	357.57	Both 5th-level slots + one 4th
Equal slots to the SR Nova: 5-4-4	325.28	332.89	One 5th-level slot + two 4ths
Reference: Scorching Ray Nova 6-5-5	334.81	342.42	One 5th-level slot + two 4ths

The verdict cuts against the bigger dice. Slot-for-slot, **Scorching Ray wins under CME** (334.81 vs 325.28), because the 3d8-per-hit rider is worth roughly 13.6 expected damage per attack far more than Spellfire Flare's ~4-point dice edge. So, attacks-per-slot dominates raw die size. Spellfire Flare only pulls ahead (349.97) by burning strictly more high-level slots, and even then it caps well below the hypothetical 399 in Chart 5a. The math paragraph for the curious: per-attack buffed damage is 24.5 x 1.0075 = 24.68, making a 5-blast round 5 x 24.68 + 4 = 127.42, a 4-blast round 102.74, and a (hypothetical) 6-blast round 152.10; the tactical figures apply the same 7.61-point concentration-loss delta as the Scorching Ray lines, which is marginally conservative for the 5-5-4 and 5-4-4 lines since their later rounds contain fewer attacks to lose.

Two real advantages don't show up in these numbers, though. Radiant is a much better damage type than fire against typical resistances, and ignoring cover is a genuine Tactical Reality benefit the sim doesn't price in. And one genuinely useful flip: *without* the CME rider, Spellfire Flare wins per slot (an unbuffed 5-blast round deals 59.41 vs Scorching Ray's 39.26), which makes it the better fallback spell for the rounds after a concentration drop.

Final Insights & Grand Conclusion

This entire analytical journey confirms what should be apparent when accounting for uncertainty and action economy.

The CME Wizard's damage potential is a textbook glass cannon. To function, it demands a massive investment in defensive feats, requires a pre-cast buff, and is still vulnerable to tactical attrition. Without these supports, its damage collapses. Chart 4b adds a third dependency to that list: consistent advantage generation. Strip it away and the build's headline number falls by a quarter, and the more realistic Delayed Start scenario drops all the way to the level of a Sorcerer with no Hex at all.

The Draconic Sorcerer is a fortress. Its kit is inherently synergistic, combining extreme range, high AC, and unparalleled accuracy into a self-sufficient and reliable damage platform. Its "White Room" math is its reality because its primary strategy is to avoid ever being in a position to fail. Hex (or Hunter's Mark) is a *much* cheaper investment than CME, but allows the Sorcerer to pump out competitive or better damage from a safe distance.

If a player is willing to dedicate their entire build to supporting a single, high-risk spell and their DM allows them to consistently pre-cast it, the CME Evocation Wizard will absolutely produce higher single-target damage. But this confirms the core thesis. The Wizard has to spend two feats on concentration, and wait 10 levels to achieve this output under ideal conditions. Again, by this point, the campaign is likely a wrap anyway. The Sorcerer achieves excellent, reliable damage with far greater flexibility and safety in little over half the same in-game time. For my money, I'd argue that the reliability of the Sorcerer makes it more valuable. Chasing the highest number on a spreadsheet often leads to a build that, in most cases, is fairly impractical.

According to the simulations I've been running and refining...

Sorcerer still wins even if the Wizard has Conjure Minor Elementals up on the 1st round.

Both are using Scorching Ray for their attacks.

I haven't run Sorcerer using Chromatic Orb vs Wizard using Scorching Ray/Spellfire Flare yet. If someone wants to try either, go for it. I'm curious how it changes things, if at all.

Please forgive me if the formatting glitches. I'll be back to check comments later this evening. So, excuse me for the slow replies.

_______________________________________

**Draconic Sorcerer** with Elemental Adept, Empowered Spell each turn, and Hex (via feat or racial trait).

**Evocation Wizard** with Elemental Adept and Lvl 5 Conjure Minor Elementals (active before Initiative is rolled... somehow)

**SORCERER**

Conditions:

"The following rules will apply for each round: The player will attempt to make his attack rolls each round using a d20 die. The target Armor Class number to meet or beat in order to deal damage is 15. The player will add a +8 bonus to the number rolled on the d20 for each attack. The player will make every attack with advantage (roll two d20s and take the highest result for the attack roll). If the player rolls a "20" on the d20 for an attack roll, the attack is an automatic success, allowing the player to make a second damage roll and add the result to the total. If the player rolls a "1" on the d20, the attack automatically fails."

[Round 1: The player will attempt four attack rolls. A successful attack will deal (2d6) damage. Any result of "1" on a damage die becomes a "2" on the first roll. Up to four damage dice from the total damage dealt during the round may be re-rolled to replace the result from their first roll. If the second roll results in a "1," it remains a "1." Add +4 to the final total damage rolled for the round.]

[Round 2: The player will attempt six attack rolls. Each successful attack deals (3d6) damage and a +4 damage bonus is added to the final total damage dealt for the round. Any result of "1" on up to twelve of the damage dice becomes a "2" on the first roll. Up to four damage dice from the total damage dealt during the round may be re-rolled to replace the result from their first roll. If the second roll results in a "1," it remains a "1."]

[Round 3: The player will attempt four attack rolls. Each successful attack deals (3d6) damage and a +4 damage bonus is added to the final total damage dealt for the round. Any result of "1" on up to eight of the damage dice becomes a "2" on the first roll. Up to four damage dice from the total damage dealt during the round may be re-rolled to replace the result from their first roll. If the second roll results in a "1," it remains a "1."]

Common mechanics (all rounds)

Hit chance, advantage, +8 vs AC 15: need a natural d20 ≥ 7. With advantage (higher of two d20s), using P(max = k) = (2k−1)/400:

• P(crit, nat 20) = 39/400 = 9.75%
• P(normal hit, nat 7–19) = 13/16 = 81.25%
• P(miss, nat 1–6) = 9/100 = 9.00%

A crit doubles the damage dice. Expected dice-set multiplier per attack = 0.8125·1 + 0.0975·2 = 1.0075.

Reroll logic: a rerolled d6 keeps a 1 as a 1, so its mean is exactly 3.5. A floored die (1→2) already averages 3.667. Optimal play rerolls only the lowest dice worth improving — unfloored 1s first, then 2s — never a 3+, capped at 4 rerolls. The floor caps (8 in Round 3, 12 in Round 2) never bind, since the expected number of natural 1s per round is only ~2–4.

Round 1 — 4 attacks, 2d6 each, all dice floored, +4

Expected damage: 37.35

Round 2 — 6 attacks, 3d6 each, floor up to 12 ones, +4

Expected damage: 76.22

Round 3 — 4 attacks, 3d6 each, floor up to 8 ones, +4

Expected damage: 53.27

Result

	Expected damage
Round 1	37.35
Round 2	76.22
Round 3	53.27
Three-round total	166.84
Expected damage per round (average)	55.61

**WIZARD**

Conditions:

"The player attempts to make four attack rolls each round using a d20 die. The target Armor Class number to meet or beat in order to deal damage is 15. The player will add a +7 bonus to the number rolled on the d20 for each attack. Each successful attack deals (2d6+2d8) damage. If the player rolls a "20" on the d20 for an attack roll, the attack is an automatic success, allowing the player to make a second damage roll and add the result to the total. Any result of "1" on a rolled damage die becomes a "2." If the player rolls a "1" on the d20 for the attack roll, the attack automatically fails."

Step 1: Hit probabilities (single d20, +7 vs AC 15)

Need a natural roll ≥ 8 (8 + 7 = 15). Natural 1 auto-misses; natural 20 is an auto-success crit.

• P(normal hit, nat 8–19) = 12/20 = 0.60
• P(crit, nat 20) = 1/20 = 0.05
• P(miss, nat 1–7) = 7/20 = 0.35

Step 2: Floored die means (every "1" becomes "2")

• d6 faces become {2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6} → mean = 22/6 = 11/3 ≈ 3.667
• d8 faces become {2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8} → mean = 37/8 = 4.625

Step 3: Expected damage per damage roll (2d6 + 2d8, floored)

E[roll] = 2(11/3) + 2(37/8) = 22/3 + 37/4 = 199/12 = 16.583

Step 4: Expected damage per attack

A crit yields two damage rolls:

E[attack] = P(hit)·E[roll] + P(crit)·2·E[roll] = 0.60·16.583 + 0.05·(2·16.583) = 9.950 + 1.658 = 1393/120 ≈ 11.608

Step 5: Per round (4 attacks) and three rounds

E[round] = 4 · 11.608 = 1393/30 ≈ 46.43 E[3 rounds] = 3 · 46.43 = 1393/10 = 139.3

Result

Metric	Value (exact)	Decimal
Expected damage per attack	1393/120	11.608
Expected damage per round	1393/30	46.433
Expected damage over 3 rounds	1393/10	139.3

It gets repeated constantly in these spaces, without much thought, that Wizard is easily the best caster in the game. There's not enough consideration for how much has changed about Sorcerer since 2014. I think it's long past time to recognize that the two classes are now on equal footing, they just excel at two very different niches. Wizards are generalists who are far more adept at solving problems out of combat. Sorcerers are specialists who rule the battlespace while retaining the capabilities needed to dominate the social aspect of the game.

Sorcerers have always been better at concentrating on powerful control spells. Now they also get at-will advantage and a bump to their spell save DC. Chromatic orb can reliably inflict appalling damage to multiple targets that can't be mitigated by passing a saving throw. Any Sorcerer can use metamagic to imitate a Bladesinger's concentration or an Evocation wizard's ability to protect their allies from friendly fire. All of them can inflict at-will disadvantage to enemy saving throws. Metamagic allows Sorcerers to easily conserve spell slots when upcasting, and they can convert Sorcery points back into spell slots.

All of these abilities grant the class combat efficiency that simply cannot be matched by a Wizard, especially when it becomes common for enemies to have magic resistance and saving throws that approach or exceed double digits. Yes, Sorcerers get fewer spells and lack access to many rituals, but they make up for it in their ability to conserve their resources and make their spells reliably land all the way up to level 20. Sorcerers can also take this further by crafting spell scrolls if they take the right background.

Perhaps the biggest mistep in assuming the two classes aren't remotely close is the assumption that Wizards can easily fill up their spellbook by copying scrolls and tomes. It should be noted that this is a DM dependent feature and cannot be reliably counted on in every campaign. Even in games where these items are offered, it requires both downtime and funds. Many will attest that both of these are often very difficult to come by in many (if not, most) games.

On paper, Wizards still outclass Sorcerers when it comes to having a bigger toolbox. They can potentially have a solution to every problem... but it's not guaranteed. When it comes to resource managment, tactical efficiency, avoiding reliance on above-table assistance, and making an immediate impact when it matters most, a Sorcerer is always going to be the better option. If you value practicality over versatility, it's a far better option.

I know it's been out of business for a few weeks. I haven't heard about anyone moving into the storefront. Tonight, I saw a ton of teenagers lining up around the block to get into some kind of event there. Later, the cops showed up and appeared to be observing and making their presence known. Nobody seemed to be causing problems and kids were still lining up to get inside. Is it some kind of venue now? I think the old sign is still there. Kinda strange for a Sunday night even though it's summer break.

The revamp of the old “Hound of Ill Omen” feature and the updated spellcasting rules have elevated this subclass from being an afterthought to arguably the most versatile options out of the 2024 Sorcerer subclasses.

The flying variant of the beast is a game changer. It has a 60ft fly speed with the Flyby trait. Dashing cranks that up to 120ft (!) at full speed without triggering opportunity attacks.

Summon Beast has a casting range of 90ft. You can easily summon the beast in the midst of a tightly packed group and hit them immediately afterwards with a follow-up spell that costs an action since casting the spell this way only costs a bonus action, doesn’t require concentration, and doesn’t cost a spell slot. You can then safely exfiltrate the bird to a different location for use on your next turn.

The only problem is… **how** do you replicate this again on later turns without leaving the beast exposed in melee range? Especially at higher levels when even a mook can potentially one-shot it. The beast always acts after your turn. Getting it back within 5ft and keeping it safe long enough to impose disadvantage against enemies again on a spell you cast isn’t very straightforward.

Turns out that it’s simple. I just had to crack open the rulebook and take a refresher course on how to efficiently utilize my action economy in combat. Here's how to get your money's worth from the beast.

**Turn 1: Summon & Cast**

**Bonus Action:** Use sorcery points to cast Summon Beast.

**Action:** Cast a spell.

**Beast's Turn:** The beast always takes its turn immediately after yours. Command it to Dash out of harm’s way.

**Turn 2: Ready & React**

**Action:** Use the Ready action to prepare a leveled spell. You must declare a perceivable circumstance as a trigger (e.g., "when my beast enters within 5ft of [designated enemy]"). *Note: holding/readying a spell requires your concentration.*

**Reaction:** Choose the spell you want to unleash when the trigger occurs. *Note: The Readied spell consumes a spell slot and requires components (including any sorcery points needed for metamagic effects) when you take the Ready action (not when the trigger fires).*

**Beast's Turn:** Command your Beast to Dash within 5 feet of the target. This instantly activates the trigger, casting the spell.

All that said, I wouldn’t consider this ability “broken” since you’re probably only going to blow the resources required for it in a difficult fight. A seasoned DM can counter this tactic by spreading enemies out and targeting the beast with AOEs or delayed projectile attacks when it attempts to move. Counterspell is awful now, but it could potentially shut it down before it starts. Dispel Magic instantly ends it. Keeping the beast alive for multiple rounds will still require careful placement but creating enough of a nuisance to influence enemy positioning and force the expenditure of potentially multiple actions to remove a summon from the battlefield is still very strong. I'd wager that a lot of DMs (especially newer ones) are likely going to struggle figuring out how to handle this for the first time. IIRC most monsters don’t have very good – if any – ranged options. Far fewer have access to spells or abilities that end or disrupt spells, particularly ones that don’t require concentration. DMs can potentially adjust to this with homebrew abilities, but that’s not a given. Some would consider that “targeting.” A lot of us just run everything by the book. YMMV.

There’s five metamagic options I’d consider taking to get the most mileage out of the beast. **Careful Spell** feels mandatory since you’ll often want to drop a spell right on top of your beast and allies. **Distant Spell** metamagic will help with spacing and placement by increasing your casting range. **Empowered Spell** is always good because Chromatic Orb exists, but it’ll really turbocharge the effectiveness of your damage AOEs. This is important in late game when it starts to taper off and it gets harder to keep the beast alive for very long. **Transmute Spell** is great for the same reason since it allows you to bypass damage resistances. A sneaky good option is **Subtle Spell**. The shortened time limit would be tricky to work around, but it’d be great for setting up an ambush against a tightly packed group of targets.

The beast’s survival is mostly going to depend on finding cover for it and staying out of reach. Isolate it somewhere inconvenient for enemies to access or target whenever possible. If you have a Cleric on your team, maybe ask them to cast Sanctuary on it. There’s other, less ideal, options like casting Invisibility on the beast or Darkness on an object (not one that’s being carried or worn) and then commanding the beast to carry it. You could even increase the beast’s movement range with a spell like Longstrider or Jump. I wouldn’t bother since you’d probably just be better off using those resources to cast another offensive spell or convert the slots into sorcery points then bring it back instead.

*Side note: the flying beast is also great to use as an “air taxi” over short distances out of combat since it has 18 STR and lasts for 1 hour when cast normally. More than enough time to shuttle the whole party one-by-one over a gap, a wall, or to a higher vantage point by lifting them. Just keep Feather Fall in your back pocket.*

Either for better or worse. What's your favorite(s)?

Mine was a restaraunt hostess that turned out to be a triple agent for three different factions in Sigil. She committed suicide after the party figured out her true identity, charmed her, and pumped her for intel. It set in motion a chain of decisions that led to my players pissing off Shameshka, being marked for death by an Oni clan emplying Yuan-ti ninja assassins, and then fleeing the city through a portal to Acheron with a rebel Mercykiller who they planned to help start a coup.

It was supposed to just be a lighthearted tavern RP session before a long expedition in the Plane of Air. The only prep I had made for that night was a table of random magical liquor effects.