D&D 4E Arcane Spell Failure in 4E

[Dice4Hire]

One reason I dislike percentile rolls is that they tend to be static, not changing over 20 levels

And that makes no sense.

 

[Cadfan]

I don't know what they will do because I don't know what sorts of changes they'll be making to the proficiency system. I'd be surprised if they don't alter that in some way.

But personally, here's my thoughts on what they should do. Arcane spell failure is a decent enough way to make sure that wizards don't wear armor. But its overly harsh on fighter/mage characters.

I'd set things so that a spellcaster must have at least one free hand. Not a hand they made free by holding their weapon and their shield in the same hand, not a greatsword held in one hand for the moment while you cast a spell, an actual free hand. I'd significantly cut back the ways to get around this restriction.

This way, fighter/mage characters could wield a sword in one hand, nothing in the other, and have armor. Its better than the current system where they either have no armor and no shield, or they have to find a prc that removes the arcane spell failure penalties. And normal spellcasters would still not want armor due to whatever proficiency penalties will exist in the next edition.

 

[hong]

Maybe the trick is not to make wizards not wear armour. Instead, the trick is to make only people who _specialise_ in armour wear it (or at least, heavy armour). I wouldn't have a problem with a game where everyone (including wizards) runs around in leather armour and chain shirts, with the exception of specialist tank builds in plate. Heck, that kinda happens right now anyway.

 

[Dragonblade]

I want a better integrated mechanic for spell failure. Presumably in 4e casters make a magic attack roll vs. the save defense of their foe. Simply convert the existing arcane spell failure defense into a d20 equivalent penalty and apply to the attack roll.

For example, wearing armor with a -15% spell failure penalty in 3e would apply a -3 caster attack roll penalty in 4e. This is simple and elegant. And heck why even stop there, let's simplify this even more by just giving all armor a single armor check penalty that applies equally to casting as well as to making checks for jumping, climbing, etc.

 

[Intrope]

Maybe the trick is not to make wizards not wear armour. Instead, the trick is to make only people who _specialise_ in armour wear it (or at least, heavy armour). I wouldn't have a problem with a game where everyone (including wizards) runs around in leather armour and chain shirts, with the exception of specialist tank builds in plate. Heck, that kinda happens right now anyway.

I like this idea. (Does Hennet's bucklesuit count as armor?).

Saga-like armor rules would support that pretty well, too.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

They'll give wizards the ability to have Mage Armor always on, and have its bonus increase with level. Fighter/mages may have access to feats or abilities to increase this bonus further.

 

[WayneLigon]

Nay. It smacks of the old fashioned hammer-fisted balancing techniques. Since the problem is not with the arcane power source itself but rather the training you receive, I'd rather see it go away or at least be linked to some other more reasonable mechanic than just 'being an arcane caster'.

Same with the Druid's weapon and armor restrictions; they feel too clunky.

 

[frankthedm]

Presuming that the SWSE save mechanic transfers to 4E, then arcane casters may suffer their armor's ACP to their rolls versus their target's defense.

Sounds quite likely

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

I hope either it is gone altogether, or they remove the "arcane" aspect. I never understood why the arcane casters were penalized for casting spells when the divine casters were not. I know from a flavor aspect it was about the magical somatic movements arcane caster have to make that divine casters don't, but from a mechanics perspective all it does is nerf the arcane casters who opt to wear armor.

An old argument I heard, mostly in 2e and earier about clerics being in melee and needing armor while wizards sat in back and fired more powerful spells died with 3e and with the Bard who casts less powerful spells than the cleric but still often engages in melee.

 

[Kerrick]

I'd like to see it applied across the board - arcane AND divine. How are clerics special? Plate mail is restrictive - doesn't matter if you're a mage or a cleric, it's hard to cast spells in it. And yet, somehow, clerics can do it.

One thing I thought of is to grant sorcerers and wizards AP light; all other classes get their normal armor proficiencies, but druids, clerics, and paladins get the Armored Spellcaster feat once. This is, of course, concurrent with the idea that everyone suffers spell failure chances. I would almost venture to say give clerics proficiency with light and medium armors only, and let them buy AP Heavy - I don't think many beyond clerics of battle would take it.

For example, wearing armor with a -15% spell failure penalty in 3e would apply a -3 caster attack roll penalty in 4e. This is simple and elegant. And heck why even stop there, let's simplify this even more by just giving all armor a single armor check penalty that applies equally to casting as well as to making checks for jumping, climbing, etc.

Eh... that means mages would be starting off with medium armor most times (-3 or -4 penalty is cancelled out by a +4-5 bonus), and wearing plate mail by L18 (when they'd have +25-30 Concentration), if not before.