D&D 3E/3.5 Thoughts about Arcane Spell Failure

Deset Gled · Jan 25, 2021

Alzrius said:
The way I saw it, arcane spell failure acted more as a deterrent than anything else. Just knowing that they'd have a chance that their spells would fail at all tended to be enough to make my arcane spellcasting players avoid armor in the first place.

This was my experience as well. If there was even the minimum 5% chance of failure, casters effectively played as if they were completely non-proficient with the armor. Some partial casters could avoid using any spells with a somatic component. And there were a handful of options from splat books to lower ASF, but they only mattered if it could be lowered down to 0%. Also, keeping track of spells that had a somatic component and doing an extra roll for every spell was an annoying process when ASF came into play.

That being said, I really liked the idea of a scale of efficiency for casting in armor rather than a hard yes/no option. I would like to see something like it in 5e. But the implementation of it 3.x leaves a lot of room for improvement.

EzekielRaiden · Jan 25, 2021

I was...not a fan of ASF. It became a de facto yes/no, in that even a 1% chance to just lose your spells was Unacceptable, and it was riddled with exceptions and ways to work around it.

I've actually found ways for a Bard to wear heavy armor and carry a shield, while having 0% ASF. It's a franken-build to be sure, but you can do it...and you really don't pay much of anything for going for it. (I mean, other than extra gold to get fancy-crafted armor and shields.)

jeffh · Jan 27, 2021

I'm surprised to see people talking about arcane spell failure as something they actually experienced regularly. My experience was mostly that a spell failure chance was read as "don't wear this type of armour". It's not like arcane casters didn't have other ways to raise their AC, or otherwise keep from getting squashed.

Horwath · Jan 27, 2021

jeffh said:
I'm surprised to see people talking about arcane spell failure as something they actually experienced regularly. My experience was mostly that a spell failure chance was read as "don't wear this type of armour". It's not like arcane casters didn't have other ways to raise their AC, or otherwise keep from getting squashed.

+1 twilight mithral chain shirt was always a fan favorite.
5100GP for +5AC for any arcane spellcaster.

cbwjm · Jan 27, 2021

jeffh said:
I'm surprised to see people talking about arcane spell failure as something they actually experienced regularly. My experience was mostly that a spell failure chance was read as "don't wear this type of armour". It's not like arcane casters didn't have other ways to raise their AC, or otherwise keep from getting squashed.

That is normally how I read it. Particularly when low-level, I didn't have the spell slots spare to risk even a 10% chance of spell failure.

tetrasodium · Jan 27, 2021

jeffh said:
I'm surprised to see people talking about arcane spell failure as something they actually experienced regularly. My experience was mostly that a spell failure chance was read as "don't wear this type of armour". It's not like arcane casters didn't have other ways to raise their AC, or otherwise keep from getting squashed.

It depended on what had the penalty & how big it was, 5 or even 10% on a chunk of armor with nice enough enchantments was acceptable, especially for PrCs that lowered ASF

Weiley31 · Jan 27, 2021

Eh I thought it was stupid.

R_J_K75 · Jan 27, 2021

Ace said:
It would have ended up with magic users stripping armor off foes when spells were gone but that was fine.

First thing that came to mind when I read your post was the "Rob Ray Rule", see the below link. In 2E as soon as some enterprising PC found a way for their mage to don cobbled together piecemeal armor in mere seconds immediately after exhausting their spells I can see the DM crying foul.

Rob Ray - Wikipedia

Imaculata · Jan 27, 2021

I still play a lot of 3E/3.5, and I've always seen arcane spell failure as a deterrent; a rule that discourages certain spellcasters from wearing heavy armor, and encourages them to rely on spells for protection instead. It forms the basis for precasting spells, and makes classes that CAN wear armor (such as clerics) an interesting alternative.

In essence, it forces variety in gameplay. It is a good rule though? I'm not sure. I think there are a lot of rules regarding spellcasting in 3E that make it needlessly complicated. Spell components and spell failure chief among them.

I use a different in-universe reason for why certain spell casters don't wear armor. In my setting, magic is like a current that can be very dangerous to the caster if he/she is not properly shielded from it. Thus wizards wear light clothing of special layers of fabric, to isolate the caster from any run away magic, and prevent magical mishaps. The magic they wield is volatile and difficult to control. A caster could just as easily blow up their own hand if they are not careful. This is why wizards wield wands and staves to get the magic some safe distance away from their own body before unleashing it. Wands and staves are fitted with magic-conductive cores to assist in controlling the flow of magic.

I did not change the rules in regards to spell failure in line with this fictional explanation, although that might be interesting to brainstorm.

tetrasodium · Jan 27, 2021

Imaculata said:
I still play a lot of 3E/3.5, and I've always seen arcane spell failure as a deterrent; a rule that discourages certain spellcasters from wearing heavy armor, and encourages them to rely on spells for protection instead. It forms the basis for precasting spells, and makes classes that CAN wear armor (such as clerics) an interesting alternative.

In essence, it forces variety in gameplay. It is a good rule though? I'm not sure. I think there are a lot of rules regarding spellcasting in 3E that make it needlessly complicated. Spell components and spell failure chief among them.

I use a different in-universe reason for why certain spell casters don't wear armor. In my setting, magic is like a current that can be very dangerous to the caster if he/she is not properly shielded from it. Thus wizards wear light clothing of special layers of fabric, to isolate the caster from any run away magic, and prevent magical mishaps. The magic they wield is volatile and difficult to control. A caster could just as easily blow up their own hand if they are not careful. This is why wizards wield wands and staves to get the magic some safe distance away from their own body before unleashing it. Wands and staves are fitted with magic-conductive cores to assist in controlling the flow of magic.

I did not change the rules in regards to spell failure in line with this fictional explanation, although that might be interesting to brainstorm.

Twilight, armor enhancement, Book of Exalted Deeds, -10%
Thistledown, armor add-on, Races of the Wild, -5%
Leafweave, armor add-on, Races of the Wild, -5%
Feycraft, armor template, DMG2, -5%
Githcraft, armor template, DMG2, -5%
Hellforged, armor template, DMG2, +5%
Blue Ice, component, Frostburn, cast [Cold] spells without ASF
It depended on when and what books you used. Those don't even include PrC specific stuff