Is a rune smith overpowered?

[Armadon63]

Well I was checking this out and it seemed pretty cool. A wizard that can cast in heavy armor would be cool. The only thing is that it doesnt seem like you giveup that much to get into the class. Is there something I'm missing about the class? Is there some major thing that might happen? The only thing I can think of is if my rune gets stolen I can't cast but how often is that gonna happen. Do you only have to take 1 level of the class to get the rune casting ability?

Seeing this class makes me want to take it right before becomming a mystic thurge so he can wear heavy armor while casting all his spells. Like taking 3 levels of cleric, then 2 levels of wizard, then a level of runesmith, then move on to mystic thurge.

 

[xazil]

Basically the same question I asked a while ago. Still unsure about them myself.

Here is the thread. http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=97790

 

[Lurker 2.0]

Well, you do have the Dwarf requirement, which is intrinsically linked to the concept of the class (just plain old taking it out seems to rob a lot of the originality). As well, you have to take care of the material components. Otherwise, yeah, it is a pretty powerful class, but then again a lot of classes are, and giving a Wizard the ability to cast in heavy armor isn't all too much worse than the casting in Light that the Warmage or alternate Battle Sorcerer get, the reduction of Spell Failure Chance that a number of PrCls give, or for that matter, a Wizard with Mage Armor and a decent dexterity. And it really is a kick-ass theme.
As a semi-related note, the example dwarven wizard/runesmith is incorrectly statted, unless Dwarves have an unspoken special ability "Ignore Feat Prerequisites". Three Armor Prof feats or one level of fighter as prereqs for the class... I think the decision's a lot easier than the class description makes it sound.