Is it unbalancing to let arcane spellcasters cast in armor?

[Angel Tarragon]

Well, it should be an option, if the DM wants it to be.

I persoanlly use a variant on the system, though no one feat should cover it.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I think it's not as hard as all that.

Fer'instance, Bards can cast in Light armor. As can Warlocks. There's feats that mitigate it a pretty big chunk at a time, and a variant feature in Complete Mage that enables Light Armor casting for Fighter/Mages, and a half-score of PrC's that reduce the ASF%, too.

Part of it is flavor, like the d4 HD instead of the d6 HD. Part of it is achetype -- Wizards should have no need of mundane protections like armor and swords! Part of it is balance -- a low-AC, low-HD, low-BAB niche needs to be filled by something with amazing firepower.

So I'm pretty happy with it as it stands. Those who play against achetypes are given the tools to do so, but the classic image of the wizard "armed only with his wits and the power of the universe!" is kept. As it should be. If it was too easy to get around, we'd see a lot of armored wizards who think they can stand in the front lines because they have Monklike AC, when they're really just leaves in the wind.

 

[Storyteller01]

Didn't vote. The option I would have picked would read 'depends on the campaign setting'.


I have no problems with mages/sorcerers spending feats to learn to cast in armor. Fighters spend their training learning to use armor and get used ot wearing it. Wizards are behind the curve in that regard.

I agree that it makes little sense for wizards and sorcerers to be effected by armor, but not divine casters. Instead of increasing the over all power level though (arcane casters are enough of a bear without armor), we tweaked the divine casters. They keep their armor, but spellcasting is a bit random now.

 

[Aaron L]

Not at all. It's nothing but a relic rule from previous editions. And actually elven and half elven fighter/magic-users could cast in armor, anyway, so...


Removing the silly restriction would actually go a long way to making warrior/arcane casters much more viable without need for a lot of run arounds and special prestige classes and feats to allow them to cast in armor.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

How about you just say that casting in armor is harder than without and can be done, only it takes longer to cast a spell.

Light Armor= Full round action to cast a spell.
Medium Armor= 1 round casting time.
Heavy Armor= 2 round casting time.

Any of the "cast arcane spells in armor" classes move everything one step down and offer feats to step things down further or to step down with an existing class.

DS

 

[Nyaricus]

Applying the the armour penalty to all Concentration checks and forcing concentration checks for armour would be far more d20-ish (with DC 10/15/20 for Light/Medium/Heavy Armour).

Great point, LT - something I might have to add into my campaign setting

Actually, many good points here on this thread. While I think that Kamikaze Midget's point about someone with low everything and amazing firepower till needs a place in the game, I also think that clerics, druids, psions et al get off pretty easy. IMGs clerics and druids only get medium armour prof, and IMCS my replacement for the cleric class, the Priest, gets nata.

I think part of it is flavour, and part is tradition/sacred cows, and part is game balance. The key is finding out a good way to make all of those things work together

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

cheers,
--N

 

[Andre]

Not unbalancing, but still a bit of a adjustment - when I think of wizards, I don't picture them in chainmail...

 

[Nyaricus]

Light Armor= Full round action to cast a spell.
Medium Armor= 1 round casting time.
Heavy Armor= 2 round casting time.

Do you mean, for light armour, a standard action? Cause a full round is the same as 1 round.

cheers,
--N

 

[MerricB]

OD&D (1974) is the only true game.

Point to Crothian.

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

Do you mean, for light armour, a standard action? Cause a full round is the same as 1 round.

cheers,
--N

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!