A rant on ASF

[Taren Seeker]

Elven Fighter/MU's were allowed to wear elven chain and cast spells. IIRC they were the only ones who could do that.

 

[JimAde]

I have a slightly different gripe with ASF. I think it's ok to include, but it bothers me that a 10th-level wizard has the same chance to screw up a Magic Missile as he does a Teleport.

So I use a caster level check with a DC = Spell Level + (ASF / 5). So if you're wearing full plate (ASF 50%) you have a 50/50 chance of blowing your highest level spell, but a much lower chance of blowing a spell well below your max. Classes like Spellsword that normally reduce ASF instead give you bonuses on this roll.

 

[Ranes]

...it bothers me that a 10th-level wizard has the same chance to screw up a Magic Missile as he does a Teleport.

That doesn't bother me, because I don't see why somatic components have to become more convoluted as spells get more powerful.

In general, I'm not bothered by ASF. It's not just D&D that disassociates mages from armour. Most fantasy art and literature depict magic users as eschewing such mundane protection. And, as Claudio pointed out, there's Still Spell.

I wouldn't mind a revision that dropped the ASF mechanic in favour of a concentration check, in the interests of streamlining the rules, but I'm not unhappy with the current imposition on arcane casters. Their lot is much happier than it used to be.

 

[Quasqueton]

First, some history: in Basic and AD&D 1st edition, there were no such restrictions. Wizards were, naturally, not proficient in armor, but nowhere in the rules did it say that it interfered with their magic. The wearing of armor was simply not one of their class features.

Interesting definition of "no such restrictions" you have there.

Could a wizard wear armor? No. "But that's not a restriction."

B/ED&D and AD&D1 just didn't say *why* they couldn't wear armor. They just couldn't. At all. Period.

Is the unarmored wizards supported by any gaming or literary stereotypes other than D&D? In literature, wizards don't wear armor because, (1) they never learned to do it, magic requiring intensive study and research, and/or (2) they are OLD and it is HEAVY.

You answer the question yourself. But I don't remember any fantasy novels that explained why the wizards didn't wear armor. Are you making assumptions?

Quasqueton

 

[fuindordm]

I believe your memory of 1st edition is faulty. Dual-class magic user/fighters could not wear armor when casting spells. The restriction on magic users wearing armor while casting was pretty solid back in the day.

I've got my 1st edition PH in front of me...

The Multi-classed Character
Fighter/Magic-User: Obviously, this combination allows excellent armor protection, the use of weaponry, and spells. Hit Points are good on the average (5.5 + 2.5 = 8/2 = 4 per double-classed level). Elves and half-elves may be fighter/magic-users.

The Character with Two Classes
At such time as the character has attained a level of experience in his or her new class which exceeds the character's former class level, the following benefits are gained: ... the character may mix functions freely and still gain experience, although restrictions regarding armor, shield, and/or weapon apply with regard to operations particular to one or both classes.

The example that follows notes that a fighter/magic-user still can't cast spells in armor as an elven f/mu could, but the MU description says nothing about casting spells in armor, just that the study of armor and weapon use is foreign to the profession. The gnome fighter/illusionist is described only with 'see fighter/magic-user' which would seem to imply that they too can cast in armor.

So is it a failing unique to humans? Presumably, if a new race were adopted that allowed F/MU multiclassing they would function as the elves and gnomes.

You're right, though, that I misremembered the dual-classing restriction.

The Rangers are another good point. Rereading their description, armor is not mentioned at all--they only say that MU spells can be cast at higher levels.

Another tidbit: in the introduction to character classes section: 'note that non-human and semi-human multiclass characters are typically bound by the restriction of their thief class only, so for example a fighter/MU can cast spells in armor.'

So I think it's fair to maintain that the restriction of such things to elves is coincidental, due to the races that happened to be chosen for the game. The intent seems to have been that nonhumans could be armored spellcasters but humans could not.

Ben

Ben

 

[fuindordm]

Interesting definition of "no such restrictions" you have there.

Could a wizard wear armor? No. "But that's not a restriction."

B/ED&D and AD&D1 just didn't say *why* they couldn't wear armor. They just couldn't. At all. Period.

I guess I don't see the lack of proficiency as a restriction, any more than Clerics not being proficient in martial weapons automatically as a restriction. I've always read the old rules as a lack of proficiency, not a statement that your class features couldn't function if you wore armor. Druid armor, however, is restricted.

You answer the question yourself. But I don't remember any fantasy novels that explained why the wizards didn't wear armor. Are you making assumptions?

Quasqueton

Yeah, you're right. I assume these reasons for it because I too can't remember a fantasy novel ever explaining the lack of armor in a way that had something to do with the nature of magic in the world. The only reasons left to me then are common-sense reasons that don't have anything to do with the nature of magic in the world, but you're right that I have to invent those myself.

Ben

 

[fuindordm]

Rolemaster explains that metal interferes with the formation of magical energies. An Essence caster has penalties for every pound of metal, over the first five pounds, he has on his person (including coins). Of course, if the armor is made from a non-metallic substance, then there are no penalties.

Can I have my cookie now?

They're in the metaphorical oven. I'll let you know when they're done.

I've never played rolemaster, but it sounds like at least their rules are internally consistent. Are the penalties surmountable by training?

Ben

 

[jcfiala]

Intersting ideas there. I'll note that I've had the occasional wizard in my games who accepted the ASF in exchange for a little armor protection. (Admittedly, not more than 5-10%, and I think at least one was specialized so he couldn't cast Mage Armor.)

I kind of like the idea of changing ASF into a Concentration check, with a penalty related to the ASF, along with a -4 non-proficiency penalty if the character isn't used to wearing the armor. That leads to someone able to wear armor and cast spells - but not really heavy armor.

Alternately, it could be based on the Armor check penalty, which allows for masterwork armor being better for casting in... but including the -4 penalty for not being proficient.

 

[Henry]

I guess I don't see the lack of proficiency as a restriction, any more than Clerics not being proficient in martial weapons automatically as a restriction. I've always read the old rules as a lack of proficiency, not a statement that your class features couldn't function if you wore armor. Druid armor, however, is restricted.

Actually, in 1E Magic-users couldn't wear armor. Period. Not that they weren't proficient, they couldn't wear it and still function as wizards. In fact, one of the ways most common to neutralize a 1E magic-user was to lock him into a set of full plate.

In that sense, I also used to see it as a restriction. Now mind you, when I frequently played AD&D 1 or 2, I didn't see a restriction as a bad thing... Now, I tend to because of the influences 3E has had on me.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I like the idea of ASF but I do not like the mechanics. Players (myself included) are just not interested in a 10% of outright losing their action and spell in the middle of combat. The net effect is not all that different from 1e.

Concentration seems like a better way to create the incentives I want to see. It would make PCs like Fighter/Wizards more viable -- if they spend the skill points they can cast low level spells in cmbat.