Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 6062966" data-attributes="member: 3192">Wizards aren't combatants. That's why their spells are only creatively used for combat. They should be avoiding fights as a general rule.If they actually had rules for the field, visibility, shape, and wearing of the Mage Armor, it would not have needed to be errata'd in the first place to requiring armor proficiency. This is just like a +1 sword. It's ignoring the magic side of the equation for a bland numerical bonus.It may seem that way to you, but it is not that way. The Mage Armor spell, not to mention a good few others, from 2E were simply badly designed and conceived in a disconnected manner. They didn't think out the consequences of their spell designs and simply wanted to make one class into another. They did this with seemingly the least amount of engagement with the game I can think of. It's the same problem that happens when designers start trying to fill mechanical holes rather than progress the current design forward organically - at least according to all the class-specific objectives of the game (not just the current DPS)."People like me" are just like you. We want the game to improve and not get stuck in poor designs. Of course anyone can simply drop or redesign the Mage Armor spell, but it is indicative of long standing design issues with the game.</blockquote>