Spell Confusion

[GX.Sigma]

So the Wizard class says you can't cast wizard spells while wearing armor. Does this only apply to the wizard class, or to all classes that can cast wizard spells?

I'm a High Elf Magic-User Fighter wearing heavy armor. Can I cast my elf spell? Can I cast my M-U spells?

I'm a High Elf Magic-User Fighter/Wizard wearing heavy armor. I cannot cast my wizard spells, but can I cast my elf and/or m-u spells?

I'm a High Elf Magic-User Wizard/Sorcerer/Warlock, and I'm wearing armor. I can cast my sorcerer spells, but not my wizard spells. I have a spellbook, with some spells I prepare in spell slots, some spells I can only cast as rituals. Can I cast my elf spell and/or my m-u spells? Wait, can I cast rituals as a wizard while wearing armor?

 

[tuxgeo]

So the Wizard class says you can't cast wizard spells while wearing armor. Does this only apply to the wizard class, or to all classes that can cast wizard spells?

I'm a High Elf Magic-User Fighter wearing heavy armor. Can I cast my elf spell? Can I cast my M-U spells?

I'm a High Elf Magic-User Fighter/Wizard wearing heavy armor. I cannot cast my wizard spells, but can I cast my elf and/or m-u spells?

I'm a High Elf Magic-User Wizard/Sorcerer/Warlock, and I'm wearing armor. I can cast my sorcerer spells, but not my wizard spells. I have a spellbook, with some spells I prepare in spell slots, some spells I can only cast as rituals. Can I cast my elf spell and/or my m-u spells? Wait, can I cast rituals as a wizard while wearing armor?

I'm a Human Rogue with the Magic-User specialty, and I cannot wear armor when I cast Mage Hand to pick that lock at a safe distance.

Welcome to confusion. This is one of the things that is probably going to change before final release.

 

[john112364]

All very good questions. Make sure to include that in your play test feedback. I certainly will.

My personal feeling would be to allow minor spells (cantrips) to be cast in armor. Since the elf and MU spells are cantrips that would solve that problem. and I see no reason to restrict rituals with the armor rules. But that's just my off the cuff response. I'm sure this will be clarified at some point.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I'd like to see bigger buckets for spells. If you're a wizard/sorcerer, and you learned burning hands as a 1st-level wizard, you just know burning hands. You can prepare it in your spell slots, or you can cast it with your willpower points. You wouldn't have to worry about which spells are from which sources; you just have a list of spells that you know. (Maybe separate buckets for arcane and divine, but that's it.)

Then you can have a general ASF rule, and anyone who has a level of dragon sorcerer can be immune to ASF.

 

[The Shadow]

I'd like to see bigger buckets for spells. If you're a wizard/sorcerer, and you learned burning hands as a 1st-level wizard, you just know burning hands. You can prepare it in your spell slots, or you can cast it with your willpower points. You wouldn't have to worry about which spells are from which sources; you just have a list of spells that you know. (Maybe separate buckets for arcane and divine, but that's it.)

I would like to see this too. It only makes sense that wizard and sorcerer should be able to synergize.

Then you can have a general ASF rule, and anyone who has a level of dragon sorcerer can be immune to ASF.

I think it'd be more like, the spells you cast with Willpower are immune to ASF.

 

[Falling Icicle]

They really should just get rid of the wizard's armor restrictions, IMO. They lack proficiency in any type of armor, and that comes with enough penalties of its own.

They could even have a general rule about casting spells in armor you're not proficient with instead of it being a specific part of the wizard class. That way, the answer to whether or not your character (regardless of class) can cast spells in armor would be as simple as "are you proficient in it?"

 

[GX.Sigma]

They could even have a general rule about casting spells in armor you're not proficient with instead of it being a specific part of the wizard class. That way, the answer to whether or not your character (regardless of class) can cast spells in armor would be as simple as "are you proficient in it?"

That's even better. I like it!

 

[john112364]

They really should just get rid of the wizard's armor restrictions, IMO. They lack proficiency in any type of armor, and that comes with enough penalties of its own.

They could even have a general rule about casting spells in armor you're not proficient with instead of it being a specific part of the wizard class. That way, the answer to whether or not your character (regardless of class) can cast spells in armor would be as simple as "are you proficient in it?"

Maybe even something as simple as "each +1 to AC gained by armor gives you a 10% chance of spell failure". Maybe light armor proficiency reduces it by 20%, medium by 40%, and heavy by 60%. Hey if a wizard wants to burn 3feats to wear chain mail, why not.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

First, note that not all sorcerers can necessarily cast in armor - that's part of the draconic origin. I find it likely that some origins will be unable to cast in armor, and plausible that some origins will only be able to cast in light and/or medium armor. I also think there's like a 50-50 shot that there will be at least one wizard tradition that lets you cast in at least some armor.

The rules as written are unclear (to me) as to whether cantrips can be cast with armor, but I personally would say that they can, even by a single-class wizard.

I'm tempted to agree that they should just get rid of the spellcasting-in-armor restriction and let wizards who want plate armor to just take the feats for it. My guess is that the reason this isn't default is that it'd be too tempting an option for wizards otherwise, and an "optimal" wizard build would be a dude in plate.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Exactly, GX! This is, I think a very solid idea, and is something I've urged here.

They really should just get rid of the wizard's armor restrictions, IMO. They lack proficiency in any type of armor, and that comes with enough penalties of its own.

They could even have a general rule about casting spells in armor you're not proficient with instead of it being a specific part of the wizard class. That way, the answer to whether or not your character (regardless of class) can cast spells in armor would be as simple as "are you proficient in it?"

This would also make Dwarf Wizards an interesting possibility (since the race receives an armor proficiency).

The best argument against it would develop only once we see how multiclassing works (because then there is a reason for a 1-level dip into fighter, e.g.).

Maybe even something as simple as "each +1 to AC gained by armor gives you a 10% chance of spell failure". Maybe light armor proficiency reduces it by 20%, medium by 40%, and heavy by 60%. Hey if a wizard wants to burn 3feats to wear chain mail, why not.

This is needlessly complicated, I feel. I'd be fine with excluding heavy armour, but measuring spell failure takes away the fun. It's really better not to allow it at all. (But that's not what I want!).