On armor and spellcasters:

Remove all ads!

Why, oh why, do spells have to be disabled whenever a magic user, even a multiclass, uses armor? Now, I've been playing various CRPGs since The Bard's Tale, and before that, D&D as PnP, and I've never heard a really solid reason for this, except: "game balance." But it just doesn't make sense. Restrictions? Yes, they make sense. Fluid movements and gestures for spellcasting are likely to be impossible while wearing full plate mail and gauntlets of crushing along with a sheild and a broadsword. But if I'm using leather or even chain mail armor, no sheild, and a longsword, I should be able to drop or sheathe my sword fairly quickly and be able to fire off a spell. Now, I know that you can have your dual or multiclass character simply take off armor to cast spells, but in the middle of a pitched battle, how realistic is it to take off a full set of plate mail armor to fire off a spell? You'd be friggin' sliced to ribbons by the time you got out of that stuff....getting in and out of armor certainly shouldn't be instantaneous, expecially in the middle of battle. So what I'm saying is this; give at least my multi or dual classed mages the ability to wear up to chain mail armor and still cast spells-give em a slight casting speed penatly if you want, for "game balance"-and make it a real combat penalty to switch in and out of armor during combat. In fact, if mages have been able to enchant so many items to give them protective magics, and they know they are unable to use armor and still cast, you'd think that somewhere along the way a mage or two would have decided to create a method for conferring plate mail-like protective qualities to a robe by now....sheesh....

The preceding rant is of course directed toward no one except a simple game concept.

 

if it helps you.your multi-or dualclassed characters can wear quite good elven chainmails without any restrictions.of course you get them quite late in the game somewhere around the very end

i personally think that if you play an rpg that is restricted by classes you have to live with those restrictions.i mean if you think your mage should be able to wear a full platemail+2 then i think my barbarian should be able to cast lvl 9 spellscrolls> )

 

But i'm talking about dual or mulitclass characters here...not pure classes. Even so, it makes no sense that a character that is primarily a magic user can't use any kind of armor and still cast spells, and it also would make sense that a fighter would maybe take the time to learn at least a few defensive or healing spells, wouldn't it? I just think the class restrictions are meant to force people to utilize parties and teamwork in the game and so forth; if everyone could cast spells while wearing armor and weilding swords, there would be little need for any pure class. Personally, I'd like to see the end of class restrictions-let the player decide how they want to play the character, a la the Elder Scrolls series....

 

Beware! Even if your dualed mage can wear armor he gets a malus depending on armor type.
Mages got spells for armor/shield that are much more classy than most of the physical stuff you can get.

[This message has been edited by Sorl (edited January 03, 2001).]

 

I believe it started like this.For a mage to be able to cast spells he/she has to have the freedom to be able to mix this and that to do the spell. With armor it restricts this.IMHO.

 

Cuckoo,amen to that.i must confess i hate most of the ad&d rules.i mean no parying,average stats are supposed to be 10 but you realy start getting boni if you have at least 16,just because you are lvl 2 you have twice as much hitpoints as before,high dexterity does not let you hit better or make you faster or let you hit faster(it improves your evading abilities,makes you abetter thief and lets you shoot better,but then again:it is easier to pull 3 arrows per round,put them on your bow,aim and shoot than to swing your sword a few times?!?

 

i could have gone on and on about monsters 4 times your size having not a fourth of your hit points...but i decided to stop before i made too many enemies...

so bye

 

Weasel, the problem with what you're saying, insofar as what the CRPG version does, is that you're able to actually shed a full set of plate mail armor and cast a spell while battle is going on all around you in relatively little time-but you're not able to cast spells while wearing leather or chain mail? Chain mail armor might be heavier than a robe, but not every mage is a weakling, either. Especially if you're a mulitclass fighter/mage, you're gonna be pretty strong. Maybe we say that a high dexterity score should be necessary to allow spellcasting while wearing chain mail or something, but it just seems inconsistent as it is.

 

I agree. I was all hyped up about the idea of wearing armor in BG2, but I buy the game only to find out the best that can be found through most of the game is elven chainmail +1, and for that you have to kill Aran Linval. The ardamentium chain mail obtained from the Drow is very sweet, but can't be kept any length of time(and rightfully so) without exploiting the bag of holding. I was really looking forward to some nicely enchanted chainmail. Ah, but what you have to settle for is not bad at all. The robe of venca is sweet and lets you wear whatever armor class enhancing rings, robes, etc you want. My Kensai Mage has AC-6, which is not too shabby at all. Plus there are all sorts of defensive spells as well. But I agree that dual and multi mages should be able to wear some sort of armor. And by the way, has nobody noticed that the game does not allow you to change armor during combat. Even if you wanted to shed that plate mail before casting a spell in combat, it couldn't be done.

 

I believe I can adress a few issues going on here:

1: Armor on mages
In the entire past (excluding 3rd) of D&D it has been said that armor cannot be donned while spellcasting. You say there is no logical explanation for this. There truly is: spellcasters, in casting, are opening and conjuring great amounts of energy from other planes and even the Prime Material Plane, and shaping them in the ways the spell is meant to function. In doing so, they are drawing the energy unto themselves, then channeling it to do its task. The simple explanation is that the armor inhibits such a transfer, as well as being cumbersome in any form of ritual or component compilation. Yet, elven chain, as just about everything elven is inherently magical, is capable of allowing such magical energy to pass through.

2: D&D rules (i.e. Dexterity, etc..)
No parying? Why do you think you recieve a penalty to AC when you don't have a melee weapon equipped?

Average stats for a NORMAL person is 10.5, but as the new PH states, adventurers, by their very nature, are not NORMAL. What sets them apart so much that they are think they are capable of going off and adventuring? It's because they are good at what they do. Mages are smarter than the average human because they study. Thieves are faster, because they have a need to be, lest they will be imprisoned or killed. Fighters are stronger because they train, etc...

You do not have 2x as many HP at level 2, unless you are playing max hit points at every level. Normally, you start out with your max roll, then roll a die every level-up. Say a cleric with a d8 starts out with a Const. bonus of +1, he would have 9HP. At level 2 his average roll would be a (4.5)+1 or 5-6. thus he would now have 14-15, not an automatic 18.

Dexterity DOES make you faster. In p&p, your INITIATIVE (maybe you have never heard of this) recieved a modifier based on your Dexterity. Thus it helps you hit your opponent before they hit you.

Speed has next to nothing to do with loading a bow. The true consumer of time is not drawing arrows, but rather readying them against the bowshaft, aiming, and loosing the string. Such are things that can only be accomplished in training. (If there is anyone out there who has ever trained in shooting a bow, you know what I'm talking about.) In 2nd editon, this was represented as Proficiencies. You would get more attacks per round as you became more experienced and thus more familiar with your weapon. The same goes for a sword, only greater. When swinging a sword, you cannot simply raise the steel over your head and come down crashing. You will find the opponents blade deep in your chest. Thus additional attacks in swordfighting are achieved through better study of your enemies movements, knowledge of gaps in their defenses, and being able to wield your weapon well enough to take advantage of a down defense. As a great swordsmen once said in a campaign of mine on combatting a great foe: 'Swinging only gets someone killed. The person who is swinging. Dancing, on the other hand, will keep you alive long enough to run away.'

DAMN. THIS IS A LONG POST!

Amon-Ra

 

Amon-ra, the idea that the magical energies are disrupted by armor is an interesting one, and makes more sense to me than the encumberance of the armor being the problem. Still, I have to wonder why leather armor is also affected by this limitation, then? Why even magicly enhanced leather and chain is affected... if elven chain is wearable by spellcasters without disrupting spellcasting abilities, I would think that there would be a HUGE demand for such armor, and that it would be a priority for development by adventuring mages everywhere. I mean, really, the explanations given in the rules are nice-sounding, but what I'm really hearing is "spellcasters wearing armor are just too powerful, they need some disadvantage, or else everyone will want to multiclass or dual class mage." It's like saying clerics can't use edged weapons-it just seems like it doesn't make as much sense in the context of the game world as it should.

 

Really good post Amon-Ra.

The Mage, when trying to cast a spell, opens a Gate between the Prime Material Plane and other Planes, and his/her body is the point where the energy goes through. Wearing an armor blocks this passage.

The previous comment about the gesture is totally right too. Someone here has ever played in LARP, Live Action Role Playing Games ??? Well, I played several times with Chainmail (15 pounds) and Plate Armors (30 pounds), and I cannot imagine doing precise gestures with the body and hands to cast a spell. And I don't talk about removing armor during a fight... *laughing*, my real Dexterity is not 18 I must admit, but not 5 too, I juggle easily with 4 balls, so maybe, in terms of D&D rules, I have a score of 14 or 15 .

 

Rasalgethi, that's an interesting thing you mentioned, the LARP thing, but as someone mentioned in regards to ability scores and adventurers, a 10 is about average for normal people, and if my theif/mage has a 17 strength and 16 dexterity, I dont see how leather armor or chainmail is going to make it IMPOSSIBLE for him to cast spells. When you read the description of Elven Chain Mail +1, the point that is made in the description is that the weave is cothlike in feel, implying that it's a matter of the armor getting in the way moreso than disrupting the magical energies. And after all, druids can cast while wearing armor, right? I mean, Jaheira has no problem casting spells while wearing armor. But if it's about being able to gesture, then she shouldn't have that ability. And what about the application of magical protections on armor wearing characters, or even offensive spells that are magic based and not elemental in nature? No, I think the simplest (and truest) answer is that the designers of D & D didn't want people to eventually end up with one uber-class; they wanted to add balance, to give some kind of disadvantage to beig a multiclass mage, and this is how they do it. Make the magic users the potentially most dangerous offensive characters in the game, but make them weak in physical defense and combat. I still think it's les about logic in the gameworld than it is about tweaking gameplay in the real world.

 

Granted it was meant to balance characters. I too feel this was the motivation behind the rules. They did try, though, to rationalize it well before simply saying it was so.

However, in terms of druids and clerics being able to wear armor: it has to do with their use of divine magic as opposed to arcane magic. They don't have to open gates to other planes, the magic is provided by their diety. Thus they don't need to channel at all.

You are obviously correct, as in 3rd Edition p&p, mages are allowed finally to wear armor. They are not naturally proficient in it, but can become so. They now recieve a CHANCE for spell failure. i.e. 5-25% for lighter armors, 25-50 for medium, and so on. I don't know if they will fully incorporate these 3rd ed rules in NWN, but it is how the game is played now in p&p.

Amon-Ra

 

Totally agree, Amon-Ra, Clerics and Druids pray their God to grant them some power, they don't cast spells, so there is no need of gesture.

About spell failure, with the rules I use when I DM, there is also a probability of backfire (with a nice effects table) when casting a spell fails, in that way a Mage can also try to cast a spell with a higher level than he/she should be allowed, I mean for instance a lev6 spell for a 10th Mage. But the probability of spell failure and backfire is more important.

 

Well, at least the 3rd edition rules seem to be making sense finally.

As for the argument that the mages are too weak to wear armor, again I have simply to point to dual or multiclassed mages. A multiclassed fighter/mage is too weak to wear armor? I don't think so. It's not a question of weakness in that case at all. I would wager that a multiclassed fighter/theif/mage is pretty strong, dextrous, and intelligent, right? So why in the world would he be unable to cast then? What if he's wearing a sleeveless chainmail tunic? I mean, it's not like he's wearing mittens...

 

I think armour for mages is so strongly missed because acceptable robes are hard to get by in BGII (there are few cheap ones one or two very powerful very expensive ones and the mid range completely missing (or have I just missed the mage boutique in Athkatla). I have three mages to feed and dress in my party and thats a major job. I consider a fire protection robe to be a mere covering of the private parts. Considering the way armour was enhanced from BGI to BGII the robes were treated miserly (the robe of Vecna seems to be the only real enhancement, and it's not even in the regular game).

 

Amon-Ra,you've made your point very clear but i still have some'buts':
1.a high dexterity-AC-bonus is supposed to be due to evading not parying
2.the only time i noticed my AC going down because i didn't use a single-handed weapon was when i had pionts in single-handed weapon style and didn't use a shield.
3.agreed at lvl 2 there is only a chance of you having twice as many HP as before but at least at lvl 3 you'll have twice sa many HPs(average...and believe me i know quite a few soldiers.they'd also die if you put a knife into their guts,and lots of them are quite experinced.their stats wouldn't be too much better either.the only thing that they are realy better at than a normal person is fighting and killing.)
4.again agreed.wildly swinging yoursword is something completely different than a well aimed riposte that gives your enemy a nice red smile along his throat.so that means the more proficient you get the faster you get BUT it is also a lot more skill involved which should make you a little slower again.my question is:why does the average goblin wildly swinging his sword not have 3 attacks with a THAC0 of 20


that's all i wanted to contradict.i can live with most of the other stuff.

 

Personally, I disagree with the whole concept of Fighter/mages any way. I think that RPGs would be a lot more challenging if you are forced to go down one path-swords OR sorcery so to speak. To combine the two is pretty weak, i feel.

Not knocking anyone who likes them - horses for courses.