D&D 5E Mage Armor

[howandwhy99]

If a wizard isn't proficient in the armor they conjure, they couldn't cast in it and will take other penalties when it is worn. Really, this is a spell more for other characters. Wizards' defensive spells are more like Mirror Image.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Mage Armor is a cantrip tax for wizards. I'd much rather they make it 1st level and last all day instead.

Then it just becomes a 1st level prepared spell slot "tax". Either you're losing one of your cantrip slots to have Mage Armor all day, or losing one of your 1st level spells. I'd much rather go the cantrip route... because having 2 spells at 1st level, one of which becomes Mage Armor... means you get 1 spell for the day. That really blows.

 

[drothgery]

Then it just becomes a 1st level prepared spell slot "tax". Either you're losing one of your cantrip slots to have Mage Armor all day, or losing one of your 1st level spells. I'd much rather go the cantrip route... because having 2 spells at 1st level, one of which becomes Mage Armor... means you get 1 spell for the day. That really blows.

And yet I'm sure WotC would get buried in nasty emails if they just made it always-on and a wizard class feature.

 

[DogBackward]

If a wizard isn't proficient in the armor they conjure, they couldn't cast in it and will take other penalties when it is worn. Really, this is a spell more for other characters. Wizards' defensive spells are more like Mirror Image.

Mage Armor doesn't "conjure" an actual, physical suit of armor. It's just a thematic name for a spell that uses force to protect you. It doesn't count as armor, doesn't weigh you down, or anything like that, and it doesn't interfere with casting. It's just an AC boost.

 

[howandwhy99]

Mage Armor doesn't "conjure" an actual, physical suit of armor. It's just a thematic name for a spell that uses force to protect you. It doesn't count as armor, doesn't weigh you down, or anything like that, and it doesn't interfere with casting. It's just an AC boost.

That is likely why spells are boring now. Instead of blur, displacement, blinking, and whirling illusions we get the "Defense" spell that's even less flavorful than actual armor in the game, but with none of the drawbacks, bonuses, or things that make it interesting.

I thought they fixed this after 2e screwed it up.

 

[DogBackward]

That is likely why spells are boring now. Instead of blur, displacement, blinking, and whirling illusions we get the "Defense" spell that's even less flavorful than actual armor in the game, but with none of the drawbacks, bonuses, or things that make it interesting.

I thought they fixed this after 2e screwed it up.

You realize they haven't removed Blur, Displacement or Blink, right? And there are still tons of illusions (unless you're referring to specific spell there, which I've never heard of). And it's not like 12+Dexterity is going to protect a Wizard from all comers. With 1d6 HD and low AC, you'll still need your cunning defensive spells. You just won't have to pull them out in every single fight you ever have.

And are you really saying that a mage who literally twists the fabric of reality to conjure a barely visible field of shimmering force for protection is less flavorful than wearing normal armor? Really?

It seems more like you're just looking for any excuse to rag on the new edition. People like you have done that every single time a new one comes out, and the hobby survives and thrives regardless. Have fun being grumpy, I'm gonna go kill some orcs with my friends.

 

[FireLance]

Then it just becomes a 1st level prepared spell slot "tax". Either you're losing one of your cantrip slots to have Mage Armor all day, or losing one of your 1st level spells. I'd much rather go the cantrip route... because having 2 spells at 1st level, one of which becomes Mage Armor... means you get 1 spell for the day. That really blows.

Or you could just forgo the small bump to your AC and rely on your meat shields. Go ask Mordenkainen, Bigby, Tenser and Raistlin!

 

[DEFCON 1]

Or you could just forgo the small bump to your AC and rely on your meat shields. Go ask Mordenkainen, Bigby, Tenser and Raistlin!

Oh, believe me... I don't see Mage Armor as a "must-have", which is why I didn't go along with the suggestions to just make it a Wizard feature either.

 

[howandwhy99]

it's not like 12+Dexterity is going to protect a Wizard from all comers. With 1d6 HD and low AC, you'll still need your cunning defensive spells. You just won't have to pull them out in every single fight you ever have.

Wizards aren't combatants. That's why their spells are only creatively used for combat. They should be avoiding fights as a general rule.

And are you really saying that a mage who literally twists the fabric of reality to conjure a barely visible field of shimmering force for protection is less flavorful than wearing normal armor? Really?

If they actually had rules for the field, visibility, shape, and wearing of the Mage Armor, it would not have needed to be errata'd in the first place to requiring armor proficiency. This is just like a +1 sword. It's ignoring the magic side of the equation for a bland numerical bonus.

It seems more like you're just looking for any excuse to rag on the new edition. People like you have done that every single time a new one comes out, and the hobby survives and thrives regardless. Have fun being grumpy, I'm gonna go kill some orcs with my friends.

It may seem that way to you, but it is not that way. The Mage Armor spell, not to mention a good few others, from 2E were simply badly designed and conceived in a disconnected manner. They didn't think out the consequences of their spell designs and simply wanted to make one class into another. They did this with seemingly the least amount of engagement with the game I can think of. It's the same problem that happens when designers start trying to fill mechanical holes rather than progress the current design forward organically - at least according to all the class-specific objectives of the game (not just the current DPS).

"People like me" are just like you. We want the game to improve and not get stuck in poor designs. Of course anyone can simply drop or redesign the Mage Armor spell, but it is indicative of long standing design issues with the game.

 

[malcolm_n]

What if a happy medium was struck and we had a greater mage armor spell at 1st level (I like the excuse to have greater anything at first level. It implies I'm powerful with my 2 spells per day). It can be reactionary (Read: Feather fall) and grant +4 overlapping Armor bonus to whatever your current AC is. If you're wearing anything better than cloth, you're immediately getting less benefit. Later one, when you get more spells known, you can keep mage armor up always and use greater in a pinch. Or keep one or the other.