D&D 5E Casting in armor - somatic only?

Ragmon · Sep 15, 2014

Hey all.

So, RAW states that:

Casting in Armor
Because of the mental focus and precise gestures required
for spellcasting, you must be proficient with the armor you
are wearing to cast a spell. You are otherwise too distracted
and physically hampered by your armor for spellcasting.

But, how about using only verbal components, maybe even materials?
I read the rules in 2 ways:
1. Under no circumstances can some one cast spell while wearing armor.
2. Wearing armor does not allow spells to be cast that contain a somatic component.

Paraxis · Sep 15, 2014

Ragmon said:
Hey all.

So, RAW states that:

Casting in Armor
Because of the mental focus and precise gestures required
for spellcasting, you must be proficient with the armor you
are wearing to cast a spell. You are otherwise too distracted
and physically hampered by your armor for spellcasting.

But, how about using only verbal components, maybe even materials?
I read the rules in 2 ways:
1. Under no circumstances can some one cast spell while wearing armor.
2. Wearing armor does not allow spells to be cast that contain a somatic component.

Missing
3. You may cast spells in armor you are proficient in, you may not cast spells while wearing armor you are not proficient in.

The answer is Number 3, the rule seems pretty straight forward to me. It doesn't mention key terms like verbal, somatic, or material it just says you "must be proficient with the armor you are wearing to cast a spell". Any ambiguity you are seeing is because you are looking at it with 3rd edition glasses on, you can't infer things about 5e based on knowledge of past editions it just doesn't work that way.

CapnZapp · Sep 15, 2014

Yes, in 5E you can't cast any spells in armor. (You can still use wands, etc, thou')

Unless you're proficient. Then you can cast all spells freely.

Roger · Sep 15, 2014

I'm not so entirely sure I want plate to be a perfect wizard cage for that bad bad spellslinger you just captured, so yeah, if someone really wants to clomp around incompetently in some armour they found, and cast non-somatic spells, I'd probably allow it, if it made them happy.

Cheers,
Roger

SkidAce · Sep 15, 2014

Roger said:
I'm not so entirely sure I want plate to be a perfect wizard cage for that bad bad spellslinger you just captured, so yeah, if someone really wants to clomp around incompetently in some armour they found, and cast non-somatic spells, I'd probably allow it, if it made them happy.

Cheers,
Roger

Actually thats kind of inspiring....big old gauntlets messing with finger gestures, can't move arms properly, can't crouch and swirl dramatically for Avatar type spells, nasty full helm echoing and changing the sound of your voice....fantastic idea.

Especially when the capturers are not aware that said wizard "has" proficiency....ooops. Hehe.

SkidAce · Sep 15, 2014

I really like it.

Clap them in full plate, chain the hands together, ball and chain the feet.

And hope he's not actually a psionicist.

Sadrik · Sep 15, 2014

I do not like it.

It needs something else there.

So you can hog tie a wizard and he can still cast verbal spells but place them in leather armor and it is impossible to cast. This does not make sense. I understand their intent but am uncertain that is what they get with this sort of black and white rule.

Perhaps while in armor while not proficient you make a magic attack against the AC (leather 11, plate 18, etc.) If you fail you fail to cast the spell and lose the slot. Something like that.