How to convince my DM things are unbalanced (or the other way round)

[The Smallest]

I have been getting really frustrated with my DM recently because he refuses, despite all the evidence I give him, to acknowledge that things like wizards being more powerful than fighters are true.

For example:

Him: Wizards and fighters are balanced.
Me: But wizards are so much more powerful! They can fly, teleport, polymorph and so many other things!
Him: But fighters have more HP and can do more melee damage! If a fighter won initiative against a wizard he would kill him instantly!
Me: What if the wizard had a contigencied Teleport or Dimension Door?
Him: That doesnt count.
Me: Or if it was quickened?
Him: Umm.... They are balanced.

I could continue, but you get the idea.

Then there's things like him being convinced tibbits are overpowered because they can copy a 4th level wizard spell. When I told him they can only turn into a really weak cat, all he said was: Well, you're not the DM. Or the time he got it into his head goblins are better than humans because they have a +4 to Ride and Move Silently.

I just find this infuriating. Does anyone know how to get him to change his weird ideas of what is 'balanced' ?

[mrguymiah]

I have been getting really frustrated with my DM recently because he refuses, despite all the evidence I give him, to acknowledge that things like wizards being more powerful than fighters are true.

For example:

Him: Wizards and fighters are balanced.
Me: But wizards are so much more powerful! They can fly, teleport, polymorph and so many other things!
Him: But fighters have more HP and can do more melee damage! If a fighter won initiative against a wizard he would kill him instantly!
Me: What if the wizard had a contigencied Teleport or Dimension Door?
Him: That doesnt count.
Me: Or if it was quickened?
Him: Umm.... They are balanced.

I could continue, but you get the idea.

Then there's things like him being convinced tibbits are overpowered because they can copy a 4th level wizard spell. When I told him they can only turn into a really weak cat, all he said was: Well, you're not the DM. Or the time he got it into his head goblins are better than humans because they have a +4 to Ride and Move Silently.

I just find this infuriating. Does anyone know how to get him to change his weird ideas of what is 'balanced' ?

Tell him to make the best fighter he can, make the best wizard you can, then kick his butt a dozen times to Sunday? I mean, I don't know your situation, but someone just refusing to accept something is hard to change. Gaming, politics, religion, or whatever you pick, it's hard to change someone's mind once they're set.

[Inevitability]

Start by introducing him to OOTS. Then, inform him about the OOTS-subforum. From there, slowly nudge him to the 3.5-subforum. Once he gets here, you'll be surprised how quickly his assumptions about the system change.

[Vizzerdrix]

Play a wizard. Sweep an encounter as fast as you can. Bonus points if you can do in before anyone else act. Next encounter, sit back, and tell the fighter its his turn. Bonus points if you bring a lounge chair and sip a drink served in a coconut. Extra bonus points if you bring enough for everyone both in and out of character.

[Tohsaka Rin]

Now now, let's do things fair, and not 'slap the DM in the face with his wrongness'. That's for the WILLFULLY ignorant, not someone who doesn't understand the nuance of the system.

At the end of your next session, ask the players to jot down on post-its one or two challenges for a single character to tackle. Ask them to make them somewhat difficult, but reasonably possible, for say... A 10th level character.

Ask them to keep the information to the notes, and not speak them aloud, or share them. Take the stack, put it in an envelope. Then ask the DM to whip up a good 10th level fighter. You make an 8th level wizard.

Next session, once it's over, pull out the envelope (best if you actually have another player keep it SEALED, so you can go 'the envelope please') and your wizard.

Have another player pull out a note, and read it outloud. You and the DM take a sheet of paper, and quietly write down what you do. Another note, write down your answer.

By the time you're done, everyone settles in, and you both read out your results.

The results should be very obvious. And you'll have done it, without having to bash him over the head with a book screaming 'BRO, DO YOU EVEN FIREBALL?!'

[Beheld]

Step 1: Play the game.
Step 2: Play the game.
Step 3: Play the game.
Step 4: Play the game.

I mean, ultimately, there is nothing you can do about the fact that someone can't see the difference between turning into any monster in the MM, versus turning into a cat.

I mean, by that logic, Silent Image is a 9th level spell, Disguise Self is a 9th level spell, ect.

Ultimately, why do you care? Are you mad that other people are playing Wizards? Maybe they want to play Wizards. You could just let them play Wizards, that would probably be fine.

In time, he might notice that competently played Wizards do all the work, or he might not... doing a stupid arena fight isn't going to make things better. Trying to get Wizards banned so that everybody has to play boring fighters isn't going to get better.

[Tohsaka Rin]

In time, he might notice that competently played Wizards do all the work, or he might not... doing a stupid arena fight isn't going to make things better. Trying to get Wizards banned so that everybody has to play boring fighters isn't going to get better.

Some DMs feel that they need to make some special effort to keep the difficulty balanced. Some DMs feel that they need to up the difficulty, and ignore balance, forcing the 'over-powered' character to pick up the slack.

This is only ok if the group knows and understands this before starting the campaign.

Otherwise, you run the risk of the DM throwing a green dragon at a level 2 party. I am in no way joking.

It's also important for you to go back and see the OP was talking about their DM thinking Wizards are over-powered. That kind of makes it hard for the OP to enjoy playing a Wizard, if the DM keeps saying their class is over-powered (not to mention annoying) or tosses things WAY out of the party's league, just to make things interesting.

Speaking as someone who had a DM that did that sort of thing, it is not fun, and lead to a lot of arguing. Getting an 'accidental' TPK because the DM didn't understand he was throwing things way out of the party's league at them isn't something you want to have to experience a dozen times.

[Beheld]

It's also important for you to go back and see the OP was talking about their DM thinking Wizards are over-powered.

I think it's more important for you to go back and see that you are completely 100% extra double triple mega wrong.

[Extra Anchovies]

Tohsaka's suggestion is a very good one - the wizard's strength isn't in having the biggest hammer, but in having the biggest toolbox. A room full of orcs? The fighter can cut them down and get a few scratches for his trouble, or you can cast Sleep or Color Spray and poke out their eyes before they wake up. A locked door? The rogue can take 20 to open it using an otherwise pointless skill, or you can cast Knock and be through it in seconds. Even a fine-tuned, perfectly built ubercharger can probably only solve combat encounters - a similarly optimized wizard can solve any encounter.

It's also worth pointing out to him that wizards aren't automatically overpowered - after all, they could still prepare Read Magic in every slot and faff about as a commoner with a good will save. What makes the wizard a poorly balanced class is that it's so easy for them to be overpowered. A sensible wizard player will make sure to choose spells that enhance the rest of the party instead of obsoleting them. Treantmonk's guide to wizards gives a good overview of how to play an effective wizard without stepping on the other player's toes (it is a bit heavy on the snark, though).

[Troacctid]

Fighters do more melee damage? Please. A single Fireball does more damage on average than most Fighters' full attacks. Wizards are better than Fighters? Warmages are better than Fighters.

[Darth Ultron]

It might help help if you were not such a believer. That will not win you any points.


But all the ''balance'' stuff is mostly theoretical.

And much more importantly the ''balance' stuff is based on how you play the game.

See, nearly everyone on the board only plays D&D ''one way''. And that ''one way'' makes dozes of assumptions, leaps of logic, leaps of non logic, rulings, judgments and such. And that all adds up to: the way people play the game makes for balance or unbalance.

For example: The people with this problem will say ''A wizard can take ANY spell (or feat or template) any time they want to absolutely.'' And, as long as your the type of person that things that is true, then you will have the balance problem.

Another great example, is that the people with the balance problem are rule fanatics, and that if page 22 does or ''kinda sort of maybe'' says something then it is absolute. So they will say ''everyone'' must follow the rules, like mindless slaves. So, when their ''broken'' wizard character does something, everyone must just sit back and go ''wow''. But put them in a game with an All-might DM and that is no longer true. The person will say ''I dos my awesome things like page 25 says I can!'' and the DM can just casually say ''nope, your magic backfires, your character explodes and dies.''

And this does not even touch upon all the stupid things like how the people ''read'' or ''interpret'' things, and, the out right cheating.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Is this actually a problem for your game? Does he ban things you want to play because of his weird notions of balance? Do your party casters actually play their classes to their full potential?

Because if the answer to those questions isn't "yes" there really isn't any need.
A lot of people had great fun with D&D for years without having the slightest idea about what we call optimization here, with wizards, clerics, fighters and rogues in the same party getting along fine without anyone feeling useless.

Don't try to fix what isn't broken. If you're so much better at optimization adjust your power level to the rest of the table.
Because chances are that all it will get you is a lot of bad blood and your group possibly kicking you out or breaking up.

Fighters do more melee damage? Please. A single Fireball does more damage on average than most Fighters' full attacks. Wizards are better than Fighters? Warmages are better than Fighters.

Is this sarcasm? Or are you counting "the damage of a Fireball when every square in the radius has an enemy"?
Because a 10th level fighter does more damage in a single hit than a CL 10 Fireball unless you stack on a lot of metamagic. Unless you're playing with really incompetent melee, i guess.

[Beheld]

For example: The people with this problem will say ''A wizard can take ANY spell (or feat or template) any time they want to absolutely.'' And, as long as your the type of person that things that is true, then you will have the balance problem.

Another great example, is that the people with the balance problem are rule fanatics, and that if page 22 does or ''kinda sort of maybe'' says something then it is absolute. So they will say ''everyone'' must follow the rules, like mindless slaves. So, when their ''broken'' wizard character does something, everyone must just sit back and go ''wow''. But put them in a game with an All-might DM and that is no longer true. The person will say ''I dos my awesome things like page 25 says I can!'' and the DM can just casually say ''nope, your magic backfires, your character explodes and dies.''

And this does not even touch upon all the stupid things like how the people ''read'' or ''interpret'' things, and, the out right cheating.

Maybe this isn't the best place for you to wage war on those dirty munchkin cheaters you hate who use rules and don't enjoy it when you use your big powerful manly phallic DM powers to blow up their characters?

[Cosi]

I suspect that the way to get the DM to change his mind is going to require both theoretical argument and actual play. Presenting an SGT will just cause him to complain about it not being "a real game", but an actual game will involve passive patches like artifact swords or monsters not using their abilities.

Ultimately though, people are right to say that if you aren't being told you can't play what you want, you should just play the game.

For example: The people with this problem will say ''A wizard can take ANY spell (or feat or template) any time they want to absolutely.'' And, as long as your the type of person that things that is true, then you will have the balance problem.

That's not the assumption that people make. If Wizards "just" get 2 spells/level, they still blow Fighters out of the water.

Also, if you tell people they can't pick whatever stuff they want, casters get (relative to non-casters) stronger not weaker. The reason the Fighter is able to do anything at all in an adventure with a high level Wizard is because he's allowed to buy items (or feats, or templates if LA wasn't awful).

The person will say ''I dos my awesome things like page 25 says I can!'' and the DM can just casually say ''nope, your magic backfires, your character explodes and dies.''

That's brilliant! If you just kill Wizards when they use abilities that make them better than Fighters, they won't be better than Fighters. Why aren't you writing D&D?

And this does not even touch upon all the stupid things like how the people ''read'' or ''interpret'' things, and, the out right cheating.

You mean like cheating by unilaterally altering the rules to punish players for picking a class you don't like?

[eggynack]

If you're trying to prove imbalance between magic and mundane, and not simply between wizards and fighters, I'd advise against using wizard in your comparison. Wizards are great, of course, but not ideal for this sort of thing. This is for a few reasons. First, while it's not easy to do by any means, or even always possible, screwing with a wizard is a facet of the game that it's easy to latch on to. They have those pouches, and a spell book, and they have a fragile familiar. There are workarounds for all these issues, but they're issues nonetheless, and they give the wizard unnecessary baggage. Second, the wizard relies on what spells they can access, and while that too has workarounds, it's all too easy to just say, "Yeah, that spell just isn't in any town."

Last and certainly not least, a comparison between wizards and fighters is inevitably one of incomparables. The fighter can hit things really hard, and the wizard can teleport the party, create illusions, control minds, see into the future, and so on into forever. Who's to say that all that stuff is strictly better than hitting things really hard? Well, I am, and a lot of people are, but it's a really hard thing to get to a concrete place. Do you value invisibility more or less than a solid AC defense, and more importantly, can you prove that it's worth more? Moreover, much of a wizard's power lies outside an arena, so any comparison that relies on an arena will miss out on a lot of wizard awesome.

That's why I tend more towards the druid or cleric side of things for this sorta thing. Both classes are incredibly resilient and adaptive, with few if any ways to cut off access to their power, and the druid especially has abilities that compare in really obvious ways to more melee inclined classes. How do you compare a fleshraker animal companion with venomfire to a fighter hitting enemies with a big stick? Really easily, it turns out, cause you're looking at direct melee ability comparisons. Even the druid's more out of the way combat stuff looks quite a bit like a combat maneuver, with more BFC effects and summoned fighters and occasionally a debuff. It's a setup where you can say, "Look at this animal companion. View how it alone compares to your fighter. Now add on a wild shape'd druid. View how it alone compares, and how it combined with the companion compares. Now add summoned creatures, one after the other. Now add spells. Is this not clear cut?" And then toss in the fact that you can teleport in addition to all of that. Makes all this stuff really obvious to my mind.

[Troacctid]

Is this sarcasm? Or are you counting "the damage of a Fireball when every square in the radius has an enemy"?
Because a 10th level fighter does more damage in a single hit than a CL 10 Fireball unless you stack on a lot of metamagic. Unless you're playing with really incompetent melee, i guess.

Back-of-the-envelope calculation:

Fighter: 2d6 (greatsword) + 9 (22 Str) + 2d6+1 (+1 weapon with two damage enchantments) + 10 (Power Attack for -5) = 34 damage to one enemy, no damage on a miss

Warmage: 10d6 + 2 (Warmage edge) = 37 damage to every enemy, half damage on a miss

There's some Power Attack math that depends on the enemy's AC, and the crit factor boosts the Fighter's numbers by like 8% or something, but basically the Fighter has to work pretty hard to match the damage output of a Warmage who has done literally no optimization at all, and the more enemies there are in the fight, the more he falls behind. (Remember that the Warmage switches to Orb of Fire if there's only one enemy.)

[Âmesang]

…so am I the only one picturing munchkin goblins riding enlarged goblins?

Last I checked horses and ponies don't get a +4 to Move Silently.

[Darth Ultron]

Maybe this isn't the best place for you to wage war on those dirty munchkin cheaters you hate who use rules and don't enjoy it when you use your big powerful manly phallic DM powers to blow up their characters?

And by ''place'' to you mean ''online''?

That's not the assumption that people make. If Wizards "just" get 2 spells/level, they still blow Fighters out of the water.

Well, amazingly, if you tell the player of a wizard character ''you can not just pick any spell in any book you want'' they don't ''blow'' things away so much.

That's brilliant! If you just kill Wizards when they use abilities that make them better than Fighters, they won't be better than Fighters. Why aren't you writing D&D?

I know.

You mean like cheating by unilaterally altering the rules to punish players for picking a class you don't like?

It is not cheating if the DM does it. Only players cheat.

And wizard is my favorite class.

[Troacctid]

Well, amazingly, if you tell the player of a wizard character ''you can not just pick any spell in any book you want'' they don't ''blow'' things away so much.

Most of the most powerful spells in the game are in the Player's Handbook, so they probably still do, actually.

[Cosi]

Well, amazingly, if you tell the player of a wizard character ''you can not just pick any spell in any book you want'' they don't ''blow'' things away so much.

Core Fighter 10 versus Core Wizard 10 by RAW. No infinite loops. Who wins?

It is not cheating if the DM does it. Only players cheat.

No.

The DM is a player. The rules are a contract between players. The rules can allow some players to do things other players cannot (for example, they allow Wizards but not Fighters to cast teleport). But if they do not allow a player to do something, that player doing it is cheating.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Back-of-the-envelope calculation:

Fighter: 2d6 (greatsword) + 9 (22 Str) + 2d6+1 (+1 weapon with two damage enchantments) + 10 (Power Attack for -5) = 34 damage to one enemy, no damage on a miss

Warmage: 10d6 + 2 (Warmage edge) = 37 damage to every enemy, half damage on a miss

There's some Power Attack math that depends on the enemy's AC, and the crit factor boosts the Fighter's numbers by like 8% or something, but basically the Fighter has to work pretty hard to match the damage output of a Warmage who has done literally no optimization at all, and the more enemies there are in the fight, the more he falls behind. (Remember that the Warmage switches to Orb of Fire if there's only one enemy.)

That's the bare minimum for what i'd call a competent fighter, and it's only a single attack. Bonus feats are all the class features a fighter gets, so you either have to account for damage enhancing feats (Shock Trooper, Leap Attack, Knockback) or the additional AoO's a lockdown build gets with Combat Reflexes, a reach weapon and Improved Trip (which are core, so it's not exactly hard to find even for a newbie).
Most likely both, because he certainly has the feats for it. That increases damage by a considerable margin even without pounce/free movement for consistent full attacks.
Even core-only you can get a pretty hefty amount of damage going with a mounted combat build with a lance, which is hardly high optimization.

And that's disregarding more optimized stuff like Dungeon Crasher + Knockback, Enlarge Person, the Valorous weapon enhancement, a barbarian dip for pounce, Battle Jump, Knockdown, Robilar's Gambit.... melee damage is considerably easier to optimize than caster damage, and it's not like you're going to use those feats on anything else worthwhile.

There's also the fact that the Warmage can't throw Fireballs all day, and any metamagic he uses to keep up in damage will just reduce his staying power.
Getting decent blasting out of a Warmage takes at least as much optimization as a decent melee build, and it's not like you're going to win any awards for versatility with that.

Warmage is pretty much the worst option if you're going for a "casters are better than mundanes" argument. The only situation in which the Warmage is the better option is when the player has absolutely no idea what they're doing and/or is too lazy to look at even core-only, and that's hardly a situation you want to base your balance around.

[Beheld]

And by ''place'' to you mean ''online''?

No, by place I mean this thread. If you want to create your own thread about how much you hate dirty munchkin cheaters who play by the rules and love using your DM powers to kill characters for no reason, and how you think people should thank you for that, I would be happy to discuss it there. But here, in this thread, is not really the place for an anti-rules screed.

That's the bare minimum for what i'd call a competent fighter, and it's only a single attack. Bonus feats are all the class features a fighter gets, so you either have to account for damage enhancing feats (Shock Trooper, Leap Attack, Knockback) or the additional AoO's a lockdown build gets with Combat Reflexes, a reach weapon and Improved Trip (which are core, so it's not exactly hard to find even for a newbie).
Most likely both, because he certainly has the feats for it. That increases damage by a considerable margin even without pounce/free movement for consistent full attacks.
Even core-only you can get a pretty hefty amount of damage going with a mounted combat build with a lance, which is hardly high optimization.

And that's disregarding more optimized stuff like Dungeon Crasher + Knockback, Enlarge Person, the Valorous weapon enhancement, a barbarian dip for pounce, Battle Jump, Knockdown, Robilar's Gambit.... melee damage is considerably easier to optimize than caster damage, and it's not like you're going to use those feats on anything else worthwhile.

There's also the fact that the Warmage can't throw Fireballs all day, and any metamagic he uses to keep up in damage will just reduce his staying power.
Getting decent blasting out of a Warmage takes at least as much optimization as a decent melee build, and it's not like you're going to win any awards for versatility with that.

His point, amply made by the fact that you are immediately started referencing only the pure gouda cheese of melee damage builds, is that with no optimization besides basic core race + basic core class + basic Core feats, the Warmage does more damage at the same optimzation level. Now you can totally stack every imaginable damage boosting source in the game to make a hyper ubercharger build, and then the Warmage can be an Olin Girsir/Loremaster or god forbid Incantatrix with Arcane Thesis on some select spells who does Chained 500 untyped damage touch attacks. That's fine, you can compare those, but his specific point was:

"Fighters do more melee damage? Please. A single Fireball does more damage on average than most Fighters' full attacks. Wizards are better than Fighters? Warmages are better than Fighters."
It wasn't supposed to be a strong comparison, it was supposed to be an example about how the basic fighters that people think to build before going on forums are really weak. Certainly you can do other things, but that wasn't the comparison.

[Troacctid]

Yes, it's the bare minimum for a Fighter, and the bare minimum for a Warmage. You can stack up additional optimization on both sides if you like, but on average, the Warmage is doing less work to achieve the same or better damage, while simultaneously having a wider variety of tactical and strategic options.

And while it's theoretically possible for a Warmage to run out of ammunition...in practice, they have a lot of ammunition. They're probably not going to run out.

[sleepyphoenixx]

His point, amply made by the fact that you are immediately started referencing only the pure gouda cheese of melee damage builds, is that with no optimization besides basic core race + basic core class + basic Core feats, the Warmage does more damage at the same optimzation level. Now you can totally stack every imaginable damage boosting source in the game to make a hyper ubercharger build, and then the Warmage can be an Olin Girsir/Loremaster or god forbid Incantatrix with Arcane Thesis on some select spells who does Chained 500 untyped damage touch attacks. That's fine, you can compare those, but his specific point was:

Fighters actually spending their bonus feats is now cheese? Even core only you still get Power Attack + Lance + Combat Reflexes + Improved Trip. That's "pure gouda cheese" now?
That's still more damage per round than a spell on a single target, and if you get off a full attack it's also more AoE than a Fireball unless you fight hordes of mooks. Without limited uses/day.
You're also still providing BFC, while the Warmage doesn't do anything but damage.

Yeah, if by "minimum optimization" you mean "took no (or no relevant to his build) feats" the Warmage does more damage. Barely, if the fighter doesn't get full attacks or AoO's.
As i said at the end of my post (which you didn't quote), do you really want to make assumptions about the balance of melee classes when the player in question is incapable of looking up core-only feats? Because the only case where the Warmage is actually on par is if the Fighter is literally too dumb or lazy to read.

[Troacctid]

My assumption was that the Fighter is spending his bonus feats on things like Blind-Fight and Improved [Whatever] that improve his utility rather than his damage. We could add Weapon Focus (greatsword), Weapon Specialization (greatsword), and Improved Critical (greatsword) into the equation if you like. That bumps his damage up to 38 on a hit and increases the chances of critting, which is like +15% damage or something? I dunno, that's more math than I want to do on the back of an envelope.

If you go with tripping as your main strategy, you lose a couple points of damage switching to a guisarme, and some more accounting for the additional fail case where you lose the opposed Strength check and fumble all your attacks for the turn.

You're also still providing BFC, while the Warmage doesn't do anything but damage.

Sure, I guess. I mean the Warmage only has Sleet Storm, Stinking Cloud, Black Tentacles, Wall of Fire, Cloudkill, Wall of Force, Acid Fog, and Blade Barrier...but the Fighter can trip people, so his battlefield control is way better.

[Dr_S]

Back-of-the-envelope calculation:

Fighter: 2d6 (greatsword) + 9 (22 Str) + 2d6+1 (+1 weapon with two damage enchantments) + 10 (Power Attack for -5) = 34 damage to one enemy, no damage on a miss

Warmage: 10d6 + 2 (Warmage edge) = 37 damage to every enemy, half damage on a miss

There's some Power Attack math that depends on the enemy's AC, and the crit factor boosts the Fighter's numbers by like 8% or something, but basically the Fighter has to work pretty hard to match the damage output of a Warmage who has done literally no optimization at all, and the more enemies there are in the fight, the more he falls behind. (Remember that the Warmage switches to Orb of Fire if there's only one enemy.)

I don't have an opinion on the discussion at hand, in part because it's been done before and I doubt we'll see anything new.

However, the post you replied to was discussing the amount of damage a fighter can do period, not with a single attack. 10th level means unless he's charging or taking a move action, he's getting 2 attacks.

Against a single target, I'm guessing the fighter win's out on average damage, though obviously it depends on respective hit/miss chances. If they're dealing damage to an animated training dummy (and therefore no crit to make my math easier) then if the training dummy has a reflex high enough to give itself a 50% chance to save against fireball, (avg damage per spell being about 28 then) then a fighter would need to hit slightly higher than 50% to match the damage. (As in an effective attack bonus of +1 greater than the enemy's AC - 10 would make the difference in damage imperceptible)

Math on that:

Avg Damage for wizard = damage * %hit + 1/2 damage * (1-%hit)
in this case because %hit is 50% this translates to -
Avg Damage for wizard = .75 damage = 28 (using your value of 37 from above)

Avg Damage for Fighter = Sword * %hit + Sword (%hit-.25)

Avg Damage for Fighter / Sword = 2*%hit - .25

(Avg Damage for Fighter / Sword) + .25 = 2 * %hit

((Avg Damaget for Fighter / Sword) +.25)/2 = %hit

Since we're looking for point of match we'll set Avg damage to 28, and use your sword damage from above of 34

((34/28) +.25)/2 = %hit

.54% = %hit required for fighter to match damage with a fireball with a 50% chance of success.

Misses penalize the fighter more, so the fighter will need an ever higher attack bonus against harder to hit opponents, and might win out against a slow dumb opponent even with an attack penalty. (giving a +2 dex magic item to the training dummy if the 2 are dealing roughly equal damage will tip the damage in favor of the wizard, giving the training dummy 2 points of dex drain instead tips it towards the fighter)

Obviously in reality there's more to it than that, but you know... opportunity to do math.

[ATHATH]

I think we're derailing a little bit here. Why don't we all agree to disagree, and get back to the question?

I liked that envelope idea, and I think it would work well.

[Inevitability]

It is not cheating if the DM does it. Only players cheat.

And thus begins the Jedipotter saga, part II.

[Troacctid]

Remember, if there's only one enemy, the Warmage will probably be casting Orb of Fire instead of Fireball, which has a high chance of causing the opponent to skip their next turn (basically winning the whole encounter on action economy, assuming you have a full party). Also, if you model damage over two rounds, the melee Fighter is probably going to be charging on the first round because he won't be in range for a full attack, while the Warmage can cast his spells as a standard action regardless of relative positioning.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Sure, I guess. I mean the Warmage only has Sleet Storm, Stinking Cloud, Black Tentacles, Wall of Fire, Cloudkill, Wall of Force, Acid Fog, and Blade Barrier...but the Fighter can trip people, so his battlefield control is way better.

Are you blasting or providing BFC? Because you're only doing one of them per round, and they're both eating up your spell slots.
The fighter meanwhile can do both at once. He has enough feats for lockdown and charging both, and he's going to do okay damage even on AoO's with Improved Trip.
Hell, he has more feats than there are decent melee feats in core, which alone should be enough to send him looking if non-core options like Warmage are on the table.

And if we're talking about a fighter who is incapable of selecting efficient build options i'd say it's a little hypocritical to have the Warmage select only good spells.

Because lets face it, at an equal optimization level where the fighter doesn't know about Leap Attack, Shock Trooper, Spiked Chain, Knockdown or Dungeoncrusher the Warmage isn't likely to know about optimal caster strategy either.
One is swinging his weapon, the other throws Fireballs, the cleric prepares healing spells and the rogue is happy being the resident skillmonkey and shooting at stuff with a shortbow. None of them have ever heard of this newfangled "optimization" thing, and they're having fun anyway.

Because they're only getting into arguments about balance and relative cheese when one of them has greater system mastery, is incapable of toning it down and the rest don't want to learn.