Is it unbalancing to let arcane spellcasters cast in armor?

[I'm A Banana]

No, I'll agree that Clerics in full armor by default isn't so cool. Which is more likely to recieve a change when the Cleric class is revised, perhaps to make it more like a general priest than a specific kind of crusader-priest (I'd hope!)

So I like the Wizard without armor. And I like the Cleric with slightly more armor, but more flexible and open-ended.

 

[WhatGravitas]

But yeah, Lord Tirian, great point there. I'm gonna have to incorperate that into my hosue rules now

Ironically, after reading your response, I also think it would make a nice houserule... before your post, it was just a random thought and I would've forgotten it by tomorrow or so...

 

[Nyaricus]

No, it isn't.

A "full round action" casting time means that you can only move 5' in the round, but the spell still takes effect on your turn.

A "1 round" casting time means that the spell takes effect at the beginning of your next turn.

Cheers!

Ah, I was confusing this with something esle then, perhaps...

cheers,
--N

 

[James Heard]

I think an interesting solution would be to make not wearing armor somehow more attractive for arcanists while still allowing them to cast while wearing it. Maybe if light armor applied a -1CL, medium armor applied a -2CL, and heavy armor a CL -3 to the wearer?

Or if, if you considering a mythical and far away 4E, you started considering allowing a lot more feats in general and one of those feats were a "Mage Armor" reserve feat that wizards got for free and that scaled comfortably as if they were wearing armor, or were part of a reserve feat chain which scaled comfortably as if they were wearing armor.

 

[cullenjaral]

Just relaying some comments from a friend of mine:

>Well from my pov the game should not be so bogged down by such things. A wizard or sorcerer raised in a Sparta-like setting would be trained in both arms and armors as well as their spells similarly, elves are well known to be very magical yet also very capable fighters. Allowing a mage to cast in armor, especially at lower levels will prevent a lot of the one-hit-you're-dead scenarios (given the rediculously low hp those classes are given). In fact the 'sacred cow' wizard/sorceror is based solely on the Middle Age notion of a wizard rather than on any other culture.

My friend does make several points here. Depending on where the sorcerer or mage was born and received his training, there could be some cultures who do train these classes on how to wear armor safely. There could also be cultures where everyone knows how to cast some arcane magic. My suggestion would be to give mages and sorcerers the Light Armor Proficiency feat for free.

 

[Papewaio of The Org]

There are plenty of item/special and feat combinations that get past spell casting failure.
There are plenty of ways to get high AC and not wear armour.
There are plenty of ways to damage someone without rolling to hit or that ignores armour.

Magic Missile, autohit.
Fireball style spell, autohits anyone in the area.
Touch spells, ignore armour.

The question really should be is normal armour worth getting?

 

[Nyaricus]

Ironically, after reading your response, I also think it would make a nice houserule... before your post, it was just a random thought and I would've forgotten it by tomorrow or so...

Indeed. And why make two rolls (one for Conc and one for ASF) when you could, indeed in a very "d20ish" way (as you put it) combind the two. Props to you - that was a Good Idea (tm)

We should scoot this over to house rules, don'tcha think?

cheers,
--N

 

[Li Shenron]

Definitely optional, for reasonable costs.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Considering the amazing expanded power of clerics nowadays, and the blasting ability of psions, I can see no balance reason for preventing arcanists casting in armour.

The simple solution that I'd go for would be this:

If you have proficiency in the armour, you can cast spells in it without ASF. End of story.

This explains the bard (with light armour proficiency) casting in light armour OK, and the cleric with all armour prof casting in all armour OK from a retcon point of view.

Wizards could then burn a feat to get a step of armour available, or burn a level for Fighter (or similar) to get proficiency in all armour but be a spell level behind.

Fighter-mages would get a big boost from this, but I think they really need the boost to be honest as there is so little synergy between the classes in core rules.

Cheers

 

[wedgeski]

I'm perfectly happy with the current system, where a mage can wear armour if he really wants but with all the attendant penalties... although the idea of shedding ASF in favour of a Concentration penalty is excellent.

I just don't see wizards in full plate, whether they burn a whole measly level in fighter to get it or not. Sorry.