Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mannahnin" data-source="post: 9351751" data-attributes="member: 7026594">Well, only for humans.  Your claim here runs directly afoul of the actual written rules of 1E, which explicitly allow multiclassed magic-users to cast in armor. Well, it's a bit ambiguous.  The rationale given on page 25 of the 1E PH is really the same as in 5E, just before they formalized armor proficiencies.  But under The Character With Two Classes (p33) they do restrict humans, despite them also having training.  "The character may mix functions freely and still gain experience, although restrictions regarding armor, shield,and/or weapon apply with regard to operations particular to one or both classes."1E kind of goes both ways on it and is wishy-washy about it.  No clear consistent rationale given. They don't explicitly say "this is a special thing for demi-humans", but that's the effect of the rules. 2E, and 3E following it, went with the more restrictive interpretation for everyone.  That armor interferes with arcane magic. Period.I didn't play a lot of 1E.  Though I played quite a bit of 2E and 3E, and I remember what a pain it was to have to work around the armor restrictions.  Contrasting that with 4E, 5E, and B/X (which I've gotten to play a lot more since the pandemic), it's pretty quite clear to me that the more restrictive route doesn't necessarily lead to a better or more balanced game.  It's more a matter of preference.  Allowing characters to freely use their abilities is generally more fun for players.  Some amount of hoop-jumping (like acquiring proficiencies) may be worthwhile as a nod to balance without making the restrictions onerous like they were in 2e (and to some extent, 3e).</blockquote>

Verification