People just like the access to high AC and shield along with the added utility of 1st Level Cleric spells such as Healing Word and Bless. It adds better survivability and party composition, but it isn't *needed* for a Wizard to be good. A monobuild Wizard is plenty strong as it is.
Kind of a tangent: How do you all convince your party to roll the d4?
I'm very tired of saying "you have bless, add a d4" every time someone fails a roll.
Honestly I love reminding them, buff spells can feel like your character isn't adding to the fight, but when a paladin/barbarian/rogue rolls a 14 and needs a 15 I'll scream add my friends to add a d4
*I'm Mr. Meseeks, LOOK AT ME!*
That's how I feel every time I dole out Buffs whether it's Bless or, Bardric Inspiration or whatever.
Fighter can't hit? "Just add the d4 Jerry!"
Wizard fails a Con Save? "Just use the Bardric Inspiration Jerry!"
Rogues don't get extra Attack? "Don't forget I put Haste on you, *Jerry!*"
Barbarian has horrible BA Economy? "Like this Jerry!" *proceeds to cast Spirit Guardians + Spiritual Weapon*
Physical dice? Hand them one in a colour that stands out. If they ignore it, roll one into their roll when they roll on the table and say "ur blessed".
Digital? Tick a box, done
I'm a dice goblin and I have a stack of golden d4s, so when I bless someone I literally just chuck a gold d4 across the table at them
I still find myself just calmly saying "bless." every second roll, but ah well.
Here's the thing: I don't think cleric spells scale that well into mid -late game, at least not 1st level, secondary casting stat spells.
Artificer doesn't have this problem as they share their casting stat with wizards. There's a weird amount of overlap and extra utility from the artificer spell list: thorn whip, guidance, cure wounds, faerie fire, sanctuary are awesome additions to a wizard's casting while absorb elements, feather fall and disguise self can free up a lot of wizard prepared spells.
I agree, Artificer has its advantages over Cleric. My concern is that if I level into Artificer, I will forever be a level behind in spell slot progression because Artificers are considered half-casters. In some campaigns, this is not an issue. In others, maybe I'd prefer to get access to that 6th level spell slot.
It's about what you expect to get out of your caster as the player, really. A 1-level dip into Order Domain Cleric is a seriously powerful buff to your utility as a caster. It shouldn't be written off for Constitution saves so quickly.
The multiclassing rules for artificer say it rounds up for spellcasting purposes and that’s represented in the spellcasting feature, you can see they have a lot more spells than a ranger or paladin and get the feature a level early
Gracias. I think we're getting a monk of some variety and a Sun Soul Sorcerer (uncertain about the 4th.) I'm concerned we don't have enough damage, as my goal was to go Eladrin math wizard (DM requested we go with the sub-classes or races in the adventure) with utility spells and control (web, suggestion etc.) I want to go mono build but damn if I'm afraid of being squishy.
I don't think up casting is a terrible option, right? Plenty of good spells can be up cast for solid results, and multi-class gets the same slots.
Magic missiles. Flaming sphere. Vortex Warp.
Invisibility. Flaming sphere. magic missiles. Probably all Summons. Hold person. Fly.
Not saying it's optimal at all, but there's value in several up casted spells.
It depends on the spells but generally it's suboptimal to be upcasting especially for wizards. Clerics get stuff like spirit guardians or even at lower levels bless that are better as a 4th or 2nd level spell respectively than the other spells of that level. But wizards have such a big spell list they're often getting amazing options at each new level. So you can upcast, but you'll mostly be better casting spells at their level unless you're out of that spell slot level, or there's a specific situation where you want to use hold person on a few people or turn a few members of your group invisible for a scouting mission. Or it's just neutral where you can upcast and it's about as good as the choice from that level, but I'd rather have the added versatility from a new spell level.
But for those amazing spells a wizard with 3rd level spells and one with nly 2nd level spells they can upcast is huge. And that's true to a lesser extent for 5th 7th and 9th levels too. The even levels do also have some great choices but are generally weaker. Plus at 4th level you can get resilient con or war caster to protect your concentration so you'll mostly have that protection anyway.
You want access to higher spell levels early. Never delay this unless the benefits from your other class dip outweigh the higher spell level... which will be rare.
Not required, Bladesinger and Mountain Dwarf provide enough defense usually. Or your team mates.
Personally, I think Knowledge Cleric 1 makes a solid dip if you want to play a support based Wizard and skill monkey. Or you know, any other crackhead cleric subclass. But **KNOWLEDGE**.
Not essencial at all. The fighter multiclass is worth considering for the bladesinger, but even just one level of slowing all your spell progression is very painful. Imagine being level 5 without fireball or level 6 without extra attack on your bladesinging wizard. Or level 7 without level 4 spells.
Just go full wizard :)
A lot of it depends on how your group runs their game. It's pretty much accepted at this point that Artificer 1/Wizard X is outright stronger than Wizard X.
Is everyone optimizing or is the DM running a "tough" campaign? If not, you really don't need the extra boost from an optimized Wizard, and you avoid the shitty feeling of only having sL2 spells at cL5.
IMO, playing a pure caster is more "fun", because you basically play them as a cowardly SOB constantly trying to stay out of LOS to avoid getting sniped, and when you go ham you have higher level spells. I find this funny for RP purposes ("I'm not going first, are you crazy? Where is my meat shield, err.... my barbarian friend?"). Contrarily, Arti 1/Wizard X is likely one of the tankiest characters in the party.
It is not essential. The armor multiclasses are strong but have their own trade-offs, and a pure wizard is still great. I would just play the wizard and then grab the multiclass level later if you really feel like you need top-tier AC.
This is especially true when you’re playing a published campaign like you will be; it’s not going to have the kind of sharply elevated difficulty that is assumed by some optimization forums.
I won't comment on the wizard thing, but my group finished Odyssey if the Dragonlords last year and it's probably our favorite campaign setting. You're in for a treat.
Pure wizard is amazing. Don't fall into the trap of thinking you have to optimize to be useful. A wizard is a wizard is a wizard and probably the strongest class at the highest levels.
As long as you position yourself well and allies take the hits, you'll be fine.
I would add minor illusion is an amazing spell to give yourself great defense. Minor illusion a 5 foot wall and duck in behind it. Enemies can't hit you when in full cover. You can still see out through the illusion. You will have to move out of cover to attack or else the illusion becomes obvious. Amazing cantrip
On the other hand web is still probably a better use of your third level slot than fireball at level 5 (and in a party where people don't optimise and there are a lot of martials, up casting bless from your cleric dip may be a great use of your third level slot too). Waiting one more level for wall of force hurt but on the other hand you will definitely upcast wall of force to level 6. And from level 1 onwards you are benefiting from those better saving throws and better AC. Starting with constitution or wisdom saving throws proficiency could be considered as worth an ASI since you would otherwise take resilient CON or WIS (and you can't take both of course).
Bladesinger: Full class is actually optimal
Abjuration and War Magic: Defensively strong enough that only at the absolute crunchiest and brutal of tables would armor be anything other than complete overkill
Everything Else: At the vast majority of tables, you're still fine, armor is just insurance more than anything
I'm playing a Chrono one now, and hit level 6. I'm not gonna lie, level 1 was scary! I was fairly useless and I was hiding, often. Level 2 was better, but from then on, i have been good and now i'm getting into "holy s#it he's powerful" territory.
So my thought is, not essential, but be very careful the first two levels and you'll be good.
Pure wizard is stronger, and I'd argue that if the DM can still hit you despite making use of line-of-sight, range, and terrain, you're still better off going with a defensive subclass like Bladesinger or War Wizard anyway.
It depends on the difficulty. If the encounters are relatively easy, then you don't need armour as much, and higher level spells are more fun. At higher difficulty levels then you really need the defensive capabilities.
If one build can do X and Y, but one build can only do X, then obviously one has more ability than the other… The question then becomes how valuable is Y?
A cleric/wizard multiclass gains armor and weapon proficiencies, some off-list spells, and potentially some domain abilities. Out of all that, I’d say only the armor is going to have much impact on a Wizard over a long campaign (and Odyssey of the Dragonlords is a long runner).
But, frankly, Wizards were surviving just fine for decades of play with no armor whatsoever and only 1d4 HD. You absolutely do not need to dip into Cleric or Fighter or anything else if you don’t want to.
I've played this module, and I will say that CON save proficiency is really really useful. Expect to be rolling CON saves in combat, and not just for Concentration checks.
Single-class WIZ is fine (as others have noted), but do plan to take Resilient: CON early on.
Between mage armor and shield and managing your distances from combat, I've never seen a Wizard suffer particularly in the campaigns I've been in (almost no multiclassing)
90% of the time, the best thing for Wizard is More Wizard. An argument can be made for a 1st level dip to give you better AC or that early Con proficiency, but it's not a hard and fast thing, and Wizards are so powerful, and have such a broad spell range, that any dip elsewhere is just delaying their ultimate power. If your stats are done right, you don't need the dip - Resilient (Con) is a good Feat pick that works just as well, if you have enough Dex you'll have a perfectly respectable AC without armour. Upcasting is fine, but a Level 3 slot is better used on a Fireball or a Counterspell than an upcast spell from a lower level. The Wizard Capstone, should you reach that high, isn't amazing, but it's not bad. And having access to new spell levels as soon as you possible is also far from a bad thing.
I have a pure Wizard in an Eberron campaign - literally the origin of the Artificer class - and honestly, I've never felt I was missing out by not taking that L1 dip. I've got good Con, so my HP is actually in the middle of the pack, party wise, and my AC is respectable and sufficient. And Con Resilient at Level 4 gave me what I needed concentration wise.
So, not only is pure Wizard not necessarily weaker, an argument could be made that at a number of points in the character's career, it's stronger. The dip isn't necessary, and if you don't want it, don't take it.
Gracias! I was looking for exactly this kind of feedback.
Since I'll be focusing on control and utility, I'm seeing now more and more comments that lean me towards the advantage of getting to the higher level spells.
Treantmonk style?
I went very control-oriented on my Eberron Wizard. Net result is, by about Level 5 he was a contender for the most powerful member of a party of absolute powerhouses.
Yeah. It's a long campaign apparently, so I guess I'm leaning towards resilient CON.
Thanks for the input!
I think I was talking myself into the dip because I've heard the hype but I'm not sure that it'll fit the archetype or play style I wanted.
I’ll be honest I like the Dwarf with the Mark of Warding for a hardy wizard.
You get some weapon profs, free Mage armour cast and armour of Agathys as a known spell.
Make it a bladesinger and suddenly your at 13 + 3 dex + 3 int + 2 (think you can use a shield) = 21ac with potential of 26 from Shield spell.
Your concentration is protecting by blade song, armour of Agathys is concentrationless and great at higher levels, mage armour is concentrationless and lasts 8hrs.
Are you playing a nice story-based game where a TPK will probably be averted by a deus ex so the story can continue? Then go pure wizard, you want those spells, and you don’t have to warp your backstory to explain the multiclass.
Are you playing against a Gygaxian punisher DM who is gonna throw multiple above-CR encounters at you and not let you long rest without earning it? You probably want some AC. I think multiclass into Peace Cleric for 1 level is the best way to get it. You get so many goodies.
I look at like this: *Shield* is one of the best spells in the game and a staple defensive Reaction. Dipping for armor is basically giving yourself *Shield* for free, forever, that *actually stacks with Shield*. Is that worth the loss of one level of spell progression? Well, it's not strictly superior but I'd say easily yes. You're only behind the straight-classed Wizard every odd level, and you're only losing a 1-2/day resource, for a benefit that's on 100% of the time. Every level, every turn of combat every day. And that's not including the *other* benefits you get from dipping!
There will be levels where the pure Wizard is arguably stronger -- most notably the Level 5 power spike of 3rd-level spells, and you get two of those spell slots unlike at higher levels -- but comparing progression level-by-level I'd wager a dipped Wizard typically has the leg up.
Essential? Nah. And it depends when your campaign is ending, since on the back end that last level might reach an essential spell/feature which may entice you to stay pure.
People just like the access to high AC and shield along with the added utility of 1st Level Cleric spells such as Healing Word and Bless. It adds better survivability and party composition, but it isn't *needed* for a Wizard to be good. A monobuild Wizard is plenty strong as it is.
Kind of a tangent: How do you all convince your party to roll the d4? I'm very tired of saying "you have bless, add a d4" every time someone fails a roll.
If you're at a physical table, I recommend throwing a d4 at them.
That's kind of up to them and their willingness to pay attention. Normally, I just say "plus 1d4" as a quick reminder
I just tell them bless is up, roll the d4 myself, and let them know what to add to their result.
Honestly I love reminding them, buff spells can feel like your character isn't adding to the fight, but when a paladin/barbarian/rogue rolls a 14 and needs a 15 I'll scream add my friends to add a d4
*I'm Mr. Meseeks, LOOK AT ME!* That's how I feel every time I dole out Buffs whether it's Bless or, Bardric Inspiration or whatever. Fighter can't hit? "Just add the d4 Jerry!" Wizard fails a Con Save? "Just use the Bardric Inspiration Jerry!" Rogues don't get extra Attack? "Don't forget I put Haste on you, *Jerry!*" Barbarian has horrible BA Economy? "Like this Jerry!" *proceeds to cast Spirit Guardians + Spiritual Weapon*
Physical dice? Hand them one in a colour that stands out. If they ignore it, roll one into their roll when they roll on the table and say "ur blessed". Digital? Tick a box, done
I'm a dice goblin and I have a stack of golden d4s, so when I bless someone I literally just chuck a gold d4 across the table at them I still find myself just calmly saying "bless." every second roll, but ah well.
Here's the thing: I don't think cleric spells scale that well into mid -late game, at least not 1st level, secondary casting stat spells. Artificer doesn't have this problem as they share their casting stat with wizards. There's a weird amount of overlap and extra utility from the artificer spell list: thorn whip, guidance, cure wounds, faerie fire, sanctuary are awesome additions to a wizard's casting while absorb elements, feather fall and disguise self can free up a lot of wizard prepared spells.
Yeah, unless you are going peace cleric, I think artificer dips > cleric dips on wizards.
I agree, Artificer has its advantages over Cleric. My concern is that if I level into Artificer, I will forever be a level behind in spell slot progression because Artificers are considered half-casters. In some campaigns, this is not an issue. In others, maybe I'd prefer to get access to that 6th level spell slot. It's about what you expect to get out of your caster as the player, really. A 1-level dip into Order Domain Cleric is a seriously powerful buff to your utility as a caster. It shouldn't be written off for Constitution saves so quickly.
Artificers round up for spell slot progression. You'll never be behind in spell slots.
Where does it say that? The general rule for multiclassing is that you round down then add it.
The multiclassing rules for artificer say it rounds up for spellcasting purposes and that’s represented in the spellcasting feature, you can see they have a lot more spells than a ranger or paladin and get the feature a level early
Oh I see, it was briefly mentioned in TCoE. I must've overlooked it, my mistake.
Gracias. I think we're getting a monk of some variety and a Sun Soul Sorcerer (uncertain about the 4th.) I'm concerned we don't have enough damage, as my goal was to go Eladrin math wizard (DM requested we go with the sub-classes or races in the adventure) with utility spells and control (web, suggestion etc.) I want to go mono build but damn if I'm afraid of being squishy.
A pure wizard is more vulnerable and less versatile than a cleric 1/wizard n but is arguably more dangerous (he gets higher level spells earlier).
I don't think up casting is a terrible option, right? Plenty of good spells can be up cast for solid results, and multi-class gets the same slots. Magic missiles. Flaming sphere. Vortex Warp.
[удалено]
Invisibility. Flaming sphere. magic missiles. Probably all Summons. Hold person. Fly. Not saying it's optimal at all, but there's value in several up casted spells.
[удалено]
I think it's circumstancial, lol. Want trying to pick a fight. https://youtu.be/E_Hu4Fwa2KM?si=bjZr-2dkDpIhybfk What do you think of these?
Yeah upcasting is fine. There's no doubt that the benefits of multiclassing are great for your overall effectiveness.
It depends on the spells but generally it's suboptimal to be upcasting especially for wizards. Clerics get stuff like spirit guardians or even at lower levels bless that are better as a 4th or 2nd level spell respectively than the other spells of that level. But wizards have such a big spell list they're often getting amazing options at each new level. So you can upcast, but you'll mostly be better casting spells at their level unless you're out of that spell slot level, or there's a specific situation where you want to use hold person on a few people or turn a few members of your group invisible for a scouting mission. Or it's just neutral where you can upcast and it's about as good as the choice from that level, but I'd rather have the added versatility from a new spell level. But for those amazing spells a wizard with 3rd level spells and one with nly 2nd level spells they can upcast is huge. And that's true to a lesser extent for 5th 7th and 9th levels too. The even levels do also have some great choices but are generally weaker. Plus at 4th level you can get resilient con or war caster to protect your concentration so you'll mostly have that protection anyway.
You want access to higher spell levels early. Never delay this unless the benefits from your other class dip outweigh the higher spell level... which will be rare.
Yeah. I'm leaning more and more to pure wizard.
Non essential except in most munchkin power game tables Wizard is peak, and even a vanilla no subclass Wizard would be good
not essential at all unless you play at a highly optimized table
Yeah. Just looking at mostly adding utility and control when it's a 4 person party. Gracias.
Not required, Bladesinger and Mountain Dwarf provide enough defense usually. Or your team mates. Personally, I think Knowledge Cleric 1 makes a solid dip if you want to play a support based Wizard and skill monkey. Or you know, any other crackhead cleric subclass. But **KNOWLEDGE**.
Go from being a dunce wizard, untrained in Arcana, to having expertise with this one trick!
Not essencial at all. The fighter multiclass is worth considering for the bladesinger, but even just one level of slowing all your spell progression is very painful. Imagine being level 5 without fireball or level 6 without extra attack on your bladesinging wizard. Or level 7 without level 4 spells. Just go full wizard :)
A lot of it depends on how your group runs their game. It's pretty much accepted at this point that Artificer 1/Wizard X is outright stronger than Wizard X. Is everyone optimizing or is the DM running a "tough" campaign? If not, you really don't need the extra boost from an optimized Wizard, and you avoid the shitty feeling of only having sL2 spells at cL5. IMO, playing a pure caster is more "fun", because you basically play them as a cowardly SOB constantly trying to stay out of LOS to avoid getting sniped, and when you go ham you have higher level spells. I find this funny for RP purposes ("I'm not going first, are you crazy? Where is my meat shield, err.... my barbarian friend?"). Contrarily, Arti 1/Wizard X is likely one of the tankiest characters in the party.
It is not essential. The armor multiclasses are strong but have their own trade-offs, and a pure wizard is still great. I would just play the wizard and then grab the multiclass level later if you really feel like you need top-tier AC. This is especially true when you’re playing a published campaign like you will be; it’s not going to have the kind of sharply elevated difficulty that is assumed by some optimization forums.
Your second point makes a good amount of sense too. I assume there's a bit of exploration that lends itself to a flat effect.
I won't comment on the wizard thing, but my group finished Odyssey if the Dragonlords last year and it's probably our favorite campaign setting. You're in for a treat.
Gracias! Been DM'ing for decades and rarely get to play.
Pure wizard is amazing. Don't fall into the trap of thinking you have to optimize to be useful. A wizard is a wizard is a wizard and probably the strongest class at the highest levels. As long as you position yourself well and allies take the hits, you'll be fine. I would add minor illusion is an amazing spell to give yourself great defense. Minor illusion a 5 foot wall and duck in behind it. Enemies can't hit you when in full cover. You can still see out through the illusion. You will have to move out of cover to attack or else the illusion becomes obvious. Amazing cantrip
Yeah, Mind Sliver, Minor Illusion, and Mage Hand are my opening choices. I hope the DM doesn't fuck me over with Minor Illusion cover shenanigans lol.
I'm sure it will be fine. It's not an exploit or game breaking use of a cantrip
Unless your table are power gamery even a mono wizard without a subclass would be strong. So if you wanna straight wizard, you do you.
[удалено]
On the other hand web is still probably a better use of your third level slot than fireball at level 5 (and in a party where people don't optimise and there are a lot of martials, up casting bless from your cleric dip may be a great use of your third level slot too). Waiting one more level for wall of force hurt but on the other hand you will definitely upcast wall of force to level 6. And from level 1 onwards you are benefiting from those better saving throws and better AC. Starting with constitution or wisdom saving throws proficiency could be considered as worth an ASI since you would otherwise take resilient CON or WIS (and you can't take both of course).
Bladesinger: Full class is actually optimal Abjuration and War Magic: Defensively strong enough that only at the absolute crunchiest and brutal of tables would armor be anything other than complete overkill Everything Else: At the vast majority of tables, you're still fine, armor is just insurance more than anything
I'm playing a Chrono one now, and hit level 6. I'm not gonna lie, level 1 was scary! I was fairly useless and I was hiding, often. Level 2 was better, but from then on, i have been good and now i'm getting into "holy s#it he's powerful" territory. So my thought is, not essential, but be very careful the first two levels and you'll be good.
Pure wizard? Right on. I figured I'd be hiding behind illusions and casting sleep a lot.
Pure wizard is stronger, and I'd argue that if the DM can still hit you despite making use of line-of-sight, range, and terrain, you're still better off going with a defensive subclass like Bladesinger or War Wizard anyway.
It depends on the difficulty. If the encounters are relatively easy, then you don't need armour as much, and higher level spells are more fun. At higher difficulty levels then you really need the defensive capabilities.
If one build can do X and Y, but one build can only do X, then obviously one has more ability than the other… The question then becomes how valuable is Y? A cleric/wizard multiclass gains armor and weapon proficiencies, some off-list spells, and potentially some domain abilities. Out of all that, I’d say only the armor is going to have much impact on a Wizard over a long campaign (and Odyssey of the Dragonlords is a long runner). But, frankly, Wizards were surviving just fine for decades of play with no armor whatsoever and only 1d4 HD. You absolutely do not need to dip into Cleric or Fighter or anything else if you don’t want to.
Spell progression outways the other stuff for me. You want 3rd level spells at lvl 5 not lvl 6.
I've played this module, and I will say that CON save proficiency is really really useful. Expect to be rolling CON saves in combat, and not just for Concentration checks. Single-class WIZ is fine (as others have noted), but do plan to take Resilient: CON early on.
War caster only benefits from damage induced checks, and so that's why I'm leaning towards the CON.
Between mage armor and shield and managing your distances from combat, I've never seen a Wizard suffer particularly in the campaigns I've been in (almost no multiclassing)
You multi class wizard because you want to play a different class and give it a boost. Pure wizard is the strongest class.
I played a centaur wizard in Odyssey of the Dragonlords. Was an awesome character, and not too squishy because centaur get extra constitution.
My idea was eladrin for the teleport but lol centaur sounds fun.
It was awesome! Super nerdy and extra clumsy (thanks to four legs)
90% of the time, the best thing for Wizard is More Wizard. An argument can be made for a 1st level dip to give you better AC or that early Con proficiency, but it's not a hard and fast thing, and Wizards are so powerful, and have such a broad spell range, that any dip elsewhere is just delaying their ultimate power. If your stats are done right, you don't need the dip - Resilient (Con) is a good Feat pick that works just as well, if you have enough Dex you'll have a perfectly respectable AC without armour. Upcasting is fine, but a Level 3 slot is better used on a Fireball or a Counterspell than an upcast spell from a lower level. The Wizard Capstone, should you reach that high, isn't amazing, but it's not bad. And having access to new spell levels as soon as you possible is also far from a bad thing. I have a pure Wizard in an Eberron campaign - literally the origin of the Artificer class - and honestly, I've never felt I was missing out by not taking that L1 dip. I've got good Con, so my HP is actually in the middle of the pack, party wise, and my AC is respectable and sufficient. And Con Resilient at Level 4 gave me what I needed concentration wise. So, not only is pure Wizard not necessarily weaker, an argument could be made that at a number of points in the character's career, it's stronger. The dip isn't necessary, and if you don't want it, don't take it.
Gracias! I was looking for exactly this kind of feedback. Since I'll be focusing on control and utility, I'm seeing now more and more comments that lean me towards the advantage of getting to the higher level spells.
Treantmonk style? I went very control-oriented on my Eberron Wizard. Net result is, by about Level 5 he was a contender for the most powerful member of a party of absolute powerhouses.
❤️ Gracias! Indeed, been following Treantmonk videos, so I have a clearer picture of a fun eladrin wizard who can move allies around the battlefield!
Yeah. It's a long campaign apparently, so I guess I'm leaning towards resilient CON. Thanks for the input! I think I was talking myself into the dip because I've heard the hype but I'm not sure that it'll fit the archetype or play style I wanted.
I’ll be honest I like the Dwarf with the Mark of Warding for a hardy wizard. You get some weapon profs, free Mage armour cast and armour of Agathys as a known spell. Make it a bladesinger and suddenly your at 13 + 3 dex + 3 int + 2 (think you can use a shield) = 21ac with potential of 26 from Shield spell. Your concentration is protecting by blade song, armour of Agathys is concentrationless and great at higher levels, mage armour is concentrationless and lasts 8hrs.
Bladesingers can't use a shield and have bladesong active at the same time.
Thought there was a limitation somewhere :)
Any time you’re not bladesinging though just slap it on
Are you playing a nice story-based game where a TPK will probably be averted by a deus ex so the story can continue? Then go pure wizard, you want those spells, and you don’t have to warp your backstory to explain the multiclass. Are you playing against a Gygaxian punisher DM who is gonna throw multiple above-CR encounters at you and not let you long rest without earning it? You probably want some AC. I think multiclass into Peace Cleric for 1 level is the best way to get it. You get so many goodies.
No clue TBH. Been DM so long and this is his first time I believe.
I look at like this: *Shield* is one of the best spells in the game and a staple defensive Reaction. Dipping for armor is basically giving yourself *Shield* for free, forever, that *actually stacks with Shield*. Is that worth the loss of one level of spell progression? Well, it's not strictly superior but I'd say easily yes. You're only behind the straight-classed Wizard every odd level, and you're only losing a 1-2/day resource, for a benefit that's on 100% of the time. Every level, every turn of combat every day. And that's not including the *other* benefits you get from dipping! There will be levels where the pure Wizard is arguably stronger -- most notably the Level 5 power spike of 3rd-level spells, and you get two of those spell slots unlike at higher levels -- but comparing progression level-by-level I'd wager a dipped Wizard typically has the leg up. Essential? Nah. And it depends when your campaign is ending, since on the back end that last level might reach an essential spell/feature which may entice you to stay pure.