D&D 5E Armored Mages

[Uller]

Can mage characters cast in armor now if they somehow gain proficiency? I'm not seeing a rule that forbids it...I'm contemplating a mage/thief character and am wondering if leather or studded leather would be a better option than Mage Armor (frees up a spell slot)

 

[Remathilis]

Can mage characters cast in armor now if they somehow gain proficiency? I'm not seeing a rule that forbids it...I'm contemplating a mage/thief character and am wondering if leather or studded leather would be a better option than Mage Armor (frees up a spell slot)

Yes, if you are proficient in an armor, you can cast in it. (Per the playtest).

Leather it up.

 

[GravyFingerz]

I hope it stays that way in the final rules.

 

[Shiroiken]

Honestly, the value of it depends on the group and it's playstyle. During the playtest, I often found that the Mage/Wizard would go most of an Adventure without being attacked, so in those types of games it's not much of a benefit. In other games, everyone is attacked all the time, so it's almost a necessity.

 

[Uller]

Honestly, the value of it depends on the group and it's playstyle. During the playtest, I often found that the Mage/Wizard would go most of an Adventure without being attacked, so in those types of games it's not much of a benefit. In other games, everyone is attacked all the time, so it's almost a necessity.

Maybe. But the character I am thinking of would be a illusionist/assassin. He'd generally avoid melee and use trickery and magic to get himself out of it (Minor Illusion, Fog Cloud, Invisibility, Blink, Etc.). I don't want to waste a prepared spell on mage armor to boost his AC. With a 16 Dex and Leather he'd have a 14 AC...not as good as Mage Armor (16). But not terrible and could boost it when needed with Shield (AC 18) when needed until he has more defensive spells such as blink, invisibility and haste.

No...this character won't be some uber assassin or melee combatant. It's more just an interesting character to me.

 

[Shiroiken]

Maybe. But the character I am thinking of would be a illusionist/assassin. He'd generally avoid melee and use trickery and magic to get himself out of it (Minor Illusion, Fog Cloud, Invisibility, Blink, Etc.). I don't want to waste a prepared spell on mage armor to boost his AC. With a 16 Dex and Leather he'd have a 14 AC...not as good as Mage Armor (16). But not terrible and could boost it when needed with Shield (AC 18) when needed until he has more defensive spells such as blink, invisibility and haste.

No...this character won't be some uber assassin or melee combatant. It's more just an interesting character to me.

If your concept already gets you armor proficiency, then you're always better off with that. Even if it's lower than Mage Armor, it's protection that doesn't really cost you anything beyond some gp. Like your concept too

Mage Armor (and Shield) should really only be used if the character is likely to be attacked a lot. Some groups set up more 4E style combats, where everyone gets into melee at some point in almost every fight. Other groups are more focused on keeping the spellcasters & archers out of melee, so their AC is less important. I've found that unless you know the DM is going to gun for your mage, don't bother with Mage Armor. Shield isn't bad, because you only use it when you need it (last version I saw was a Reaction).

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I could live with it either way, though I actually am fond of it being difficult to make armored mages in D&D (and I've been playing armored mages since AD&D).

Part of the reason for my fondness is themes and concepts floating in my head. Part is also that- for many reasons- my spellcasters frequently find themselves in melee. And like Uller, I'm loathe to use slots for SELF-only AC boosts.

 

[Lanefan]

Can mage characters cast in armor now if they somehow gain proficiency?

I sure hope not, or not without a very significant chance of failure and-or wild surge.

And does that mean armour proficiencies a la 3e are still in? Sigh...I far prefer the simplicity of class x can use up to armour y, as in:

All Warrior classes: any
Clerics: any unless forbidden by deity
Druids: leather, hide, or lighter*; use of any metal armour blocks spellcasting and restricts or cancels other abilities
All Rogue classes, Bards, and Monks: leather or lighter*; use of heavier severely restricts or cancels many class abilities
All Wizard classes: none*; use of any armour severely restricts or blocks spellcasting


* - occasionally, very rare and extremely expensive armour may be found that has been enchanted so as to bypass these restrictions.

Lan-"keep it simple"-efan

 

[Kobold Stew]

Mountain dwarf mages would have armour proficiency.

(I'm currently playing a mountain dwarf druid; it's low level, but I don't feel it's actually throwing the game in any way, though it is changing the way I play a druid.)

 

[ccooke]

Maybe. But the character I am thinking of would be a illusionist/assassin. He'd generally avoid melee and use trickery and magic to get himself out of it (Minor Illusion, Fog Cloud, Invisibility, Blink, Etc.). I don't want to waste a prepared spell on mage armor to boost his AC. With a 16 Dex and Leather he'd have a 14 AC...not as good as Mage Armor (16). But not terrible and could boost it when needed with Shield (AC 18) when needed until he has more defensive spells such as blink, invisibility and haste.

No...this character won't be some uber assassin or melee combatant. It's more just an interesting character to me.

Hmm. Rogues are proficient with light and medium armour - for another 5lb in weight and 15gp, you could go with Studded Leather for AC15. The "Max +2 dex mod" for medium armour only applies to the dex bonus you add to AC and Studded Leather has no reduction in speed or stealth.

(Nice character concept, btw)