Freedom of Movement and Armor...

[RigaMortus]

Does Freedom of Movement negate the Armor check penalities for wearing armor? What about the reduced speed of some armors?

 

[mikebr99]

Does Freedom of Movement negate the Armor check penalities for wearing armor? What about the reduced speed of some armors?

Nope... helps with magical impediments to movement, with grapples, and underwater movement. That is the sum total of what the spell does.


Mike

 

[RigaMortus]

I probably should have posted the spell for people to see:

Freedom of Movement
Abjuration
Level: Brd 4, Clr 4, Drd 4, Luck 4, Rgr 4
Components: V, S, M, DF
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Personal or touch
Target: You or creature touched
Duration: 10 min./level
Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless)
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)
This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement, such as paralysis, solid fog, slow, and web. The subject automatically succeeds on any grapple check made to resist a grapple attempt, as well as on grapple checks or Escape Artist checks made to escape a grapple or a pin.
The spell also allows the subject to move and attack normally while underwater, even with slashing weapons such as axes and swords or with bludgeoning weapons such as flails, hammers, and maces, provided that the weapon is wielded in the hand rather than hurled. The freedom of movement spell does not, however, allow water breathing.
Material Component: A leather thong, bound around the arm or a similar appendage.

The spell allows you to MOVE and attack normally for the duration of the spell. If my normal movement is 30', but my armor is restricting that to 15', wouldn't the spell allow me to use my full movement, as "normal"?

 

[mikebr99]

I probably should have posted the spell for people to see:



The spell allows you to MOVE and attack normally for the duration of the spell. If my normal movement is 30', but my armor is restricting that to 15', wouldn't the spell allow me to use my full movement, as "normal"?

Again... no.

Spell descriptions or rule descriptions for that matter tend to lay out the maximum stuff that can be accomplished... if you don't see exactly what you are looking for, in the description, it can't be done... go see your DM for a house rule.


Mike

 

[Scion]

normal movement in heavy armor is whatever the new movement is

although, I could definately see the spell helping someone get out of armor much faster than would otherwise be allowed.

I could definately see the arguement going either way though, depending on the dm.

Still though, if one can move at full speed while wearing heavy armor with this spell then the same would be true for being under a heavy load.

Personally I would allow full movement under either case, simply by making the armor and gear stay behind while you moved ahead

 

[RigaMortus]

But isn't it stating what you can do with it? It explicitly says you can MOVE and attack normally, for the duration of the spell. How much more explicit can you get? I'm just looking for clarification. Seems to me that, if my normal movement is 30, and something is impeding that movement (whether it be terrain, a spell or armor), this spell will help me retain my "normal" movement.

I just find it odd that you can retain your normal speed while under water, but you can't when wearing armor.

 

[sledged]

But isn't it stating what you can do with it? It explicitly says you can MOVE and attack normally, for the duration of the spell. How much more explicit can you get? I'm just looking for clarification. Seems to me that, if my normal movement is 30, and something is impeding that movement (whether it be terrain, a spell or armor), this spell will help me retain my "normal" movement.

I just find it odd that you can retain your normal speed while under water, but you can't when wearing armor.

I can see a lot of arcane spellcasters wearing rings of freedom of movement and full plate armor.

 

[Scion]

I find it odd that if you have a spell that only requires having one free hand, and you have that one free hand, then having a shield in your not free hand still incurs penalties.

Just the way the system works though

 

[sledged]

I find it odd that the average 16-year-old human has more skills than the average elf more than seven times his age.

 

[mikebr99]

I find it odd that the average 16-year-old human has more skills than the average elf more than seven times his age.

But didn't you know everything when you were a teenager? I know I did.

It's all down hill from there boys...


Mike