Wizards, Armour and the Collective Consciousness
- Thread starter NerfedWizard
- Start date
The Green Adam
First Post
I can't speak for other but I was addressing the idea of magic user/spell caster wearing armor, not really thinking game mechanics or a particular edition of a particular game. While you're probably correct, I'm imagining that for the sake of the OP's argument with his friend, a fighter with rituals is a little different from a wizard who can wear armor. I kinda figured examples of the 'armored mages theme' was more what he was looking for.
AD
NerfedWizard
First Post
My obstinate friend's stubborn reply
Did you believe me when I said he was obstinate and stubborn? If not, you will now!!!
His reply to me via e-mail was:-
> Matt i read all the threads and you lose mate,
> here is why, pass this on to your thread buddies.
> ( First of all i am the DM and have been playing
> for over 30 years,
This is partly true. The debate has arisen in the
context of him writing a game for him to DM. I
also referee games for our group (AD&D 1st edition
and Omnifray) and currently a 3rd member of the
group is reffing AD&D 1st edition and has refereed
other games. The 3 of us are the group's referees,
in a group currently of about 5.
> so i guess i am a Greybeard, i have played
> Basic, 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 3.5 Editions,
Me too - if I am somewhat younger than old
Greybeard as we shall now call him!
> we are not and never will play 4th Ed i am sure.
I hope he's right...
> Matt being Matt para-phrased
> our argument missing out some
> important bits I DID mention armours
> effects on Somatic gestures during spellcasting,
I've already clarified that, nice to see he was reading
the threads carefully
> and wizards tend to spend more time in the
> library than learning weapons and training
> in armours,
That's just one more unnecessary assumption
to add to the pile. What if wizardry depends on
a small amount of book learning, but lots of talent?
And what about characters who are part-time
warriors and part-time wizards - can't they wear
armour and cast spells?
> i was willing to accept Sorcerers and
> self taught Mages could wear None-metallic
> armour including Mithril Shirt and Elfin Chain
> mail as they are light and have no iron,
Irrelevant, really. The point is that I don't see
why some arcane spellcasters shouldn't wear
full plate.
> it is the magnetic effects that in the DM`s
> opinion can have an adverse effect on
> arcane spellcasting as well as the other points.
MAGNETIC??? Do I hear you correctly??? So is magic
part of the laws of modern physics now??? What a
load of complete bunkum.
And finally the relevant bit:-
> Sparhawk is a Paladin, it actually says in
> dialogue with Sephrenia that Styrics
> cannot wear armour as it interferes
> with their spellcasting.
?
> Garion is not a wizard like Belgarath and
> Polgara you never see them in armour.
BULLCR**!!! I have read the Belgariad and
distinctly remember Garion being a fearsome
wizard.
> Darth Vader is an Anti-Paladin(Blackgaurd).
No, strictly he is in Omnifray terms a mystic,
and in D&D terms not exactly a psionic, but
pretty close to being one.
> Thulsa Doom is a Cleric of Set.
?
> WFRP Wizards cannot wear armour at all either.
Is that right?
> I don`t count Amber as its not an RPG
> as it has no dice its just a Storygame.
Please, please rip him to bits on this!!!
And then he made some smart comment about
the guy that called him a douche, and how he
(Greybeard) is 6'5" and can cast teleport. But
don't worry, he gets a spell failure chance because
his wristwatch has 5 grams of metal in it.
;-)
Did you believe me when I said he was obstinate and stubborn? If not, you will now!!!
His reply to me via e-mail was:-
> Matt i read all the threads and you lose mate,
> here is why, pass this on to your thread buddies.
> ( First of all i am the DM and have been playing
> for over 30 years,
This is partly true. The debate has arisen in the
context of him writing a game for him to DM. I
also referee games for our group (AD&D 1st edition
and Omnifray) and currently a 3rd member of the
group is reffing AD&D 1st edition and has refereed
other games. The 3 of us are the group's referees,
in a group currently of about 5.
> so i guess i am a Greybeard, i have played
> Basic, 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 3.5 Editions,
Me too - if I am somewhat younger than old
Greybeard as we shall now call him!
> we are not and never will play 4th Ed i am sure.
I hope he's right...
> Matt being Matt para-phrased
> our argument missing out some
> important bits I DID mention armours
> effects on Somatic gestures during spellcasting,
I've already clarified that, nice to see he was reading
the threads carefully
> and wizards tend to spend more time in the
> library than learning weapons and training
> in armours,
That's just one more unnecessary assumption
to add to the pile. What if wizardry depends on
a small amount of book learning, but lots of talent?
And what about characters who are part-time
warriors and part-time wizards - can't they wear
armour and cast spells?
> i was willing to accept Sorcerers and
> self taught Mages could wear None-metallic
> armour including Mithril Shirt and Elfin Chain
> mail as they are light and have no iron,
Irrelevant, really. The point is that I don't see
why some arcane spellcasters shouldn't wear
full plate.
> it is the magnetic effects that in the DM`s
> opinion can have an adverse effect on
> arcane spellcasting as well as the other points.
MAGNETIC??? Do I hear you correctly??? So is magic
part of the laws of modern physics now??? What a
load of complete bunkum.
And finally the relevant bit:-
> Sparhawk is a Paladin, it actually says in
> dialogue with Sephrenia that Styrics
> cannot wear armour as it interferes
> with their spellcasting.
?
> Garion is not a wizard like Belgarath and
> Polgara you never see them in armour.
BULLCR**!!! I have read the Belgariad and
distinctly remember Garion being a fearsome
wizard.
> Darth Vader is an Anti-Paladin(Blackgaurd).
No, strictly he is in Omnifray terms a mystic,
and in D&D terms not exactly a psionic, but
pretty close to being one.
> Thulsa Doom is a Cleric of Set.
?
> WFRP Wizards cannot wear armour at all either.
Is that right?
> I don`t count Amber as its not an RPG
> as it has no dice its just a Storygame.
Please, please rip him to bits on this!!!
And then he made some smart comment about
the guy that called him a douche, and how he
(Greybeard) is 6'5" and can cast teleport. But
don't worry, he gets a spell failure chance because
his wristwatch has 5 grams of metal in it.
;-)
The OP's GM seems to be putting the cart before the horse.
Most game designers will tell you wizards can't wear armor for game balance reasons. If a 1st level wizard could wear armor and use weapons, he'd be better than a 1st level fighter (until he gets hit)
The RATIONALIZATION of the rule is simply fluff. If you're campaign guide says the metal interferes, it's just a rationalization for the rule.
Since wizards don't suffer penalties for wearing rings, crowns, necklaces or bracers (non-combat kind) all made of metal, we know that the No-Armor clause is just a game balancer.
It also doesn't take special training to wear armor. Go try some on. It's pretty easy, like getting dressed. Once again, it's just a game balancer.
At most, wearing armor will slow your movement down, that's travel movement, not hand coordination.
Ultimately, it comes down to this: If the RULES say a WIZARD cannot wear armor, he cannot. If the RULES say a MULTI-CLASS WIZARD can wear armor, he can.
The reasons given, are just fluff. In any game, you are best served to find a rationalization that supports the rules, than to argue and fight against the rules.
If you don't like the rules, go play another game.
Most game designers will tell you wizards can't wear armor for game balance reasons. If a 1st level wizard could wear armor and use weapons, he'd be better than a 1st level fighter (until he gets hit)
The RATIONALIZATION of the rule is simply fluff. If you're campaign guide says the metal interferes, it's just a rationalization for the rule.
Since wizards don't suffer penalties for wearing rings, crowns, necklaces or bracers (non-combat kind) all made of metal, we know that the No-Armor clause is just a game balancer.
It also doesn't take special training to wear armor. Go try some on. It's pretty easy, like getting dressed. Once again, it's just a game balancer.
At most, wearing armor will slow your movement down, that's travel movement, not hand coordination.
Ultimately, it comes down to this: If the RULES say a WIZARD cannot wear armor, he cannot. If the RULES say a MULTI-CLASS WIZARD can wear armor, he can.
The reasons given, are just fluff. In any game, you are best served to find a rationalization that supports the rules, than to argue and fight against the rules.
If you don't like the rules, go play another game.
billd91
Not your screen monkey (he/him) 🇺🇦🇵🇸🏳️⚧️
Ultimate solution: whenever he wants to play a wizard-type character, he can go about his business without armor. If that's the flavor he wants to play, more power to him. But his idiosyncracies, as a player, should not override the rest of the game... unless, of course, he's DM, then beware his house rules.
NerfedWizard
First Post
I think to be fair wearing armour (from my experience of wearing heavy chainmail armour with breastplate and greaves and helmet) DOES modestly interfere with fighting speed, speed of arm movements etc. - when using ultralight latex weaponry. I don't think it would have a significant impact if using metal weapons - I'll have to ask my reenactor friend [edit] - my reenactor friend says it makes no difference what armour you are wearing, if you are using heavy weapons [/edit]. But if it interferes with fighting speed with ultralight carbon fibre core latex weaponry, presumably it might interfere modestly with hand gestures. But the key here is "modestly" - it's not a significant interference, unless, for game-balance reasons, you want it to be. And wearing heavy armour definitely does lead to me getting tired out from physical activity somewhat quicker. I would say - unarmoured I could probably LARP for about 12 hours with minimal breaks, but in heavy armour I'm getting tired after 6 hours, and knackered after 8 or 9. But that's a LONG day. For intense fights, I might be OK for 10-15 minutes without armour, but 5-10 with armour - but that's me being very unfit. If I managed just a little bit more daily exercise, I think we would be talking 20-25 minutes without armour, 15-20 with armour (intense fighting). That's a lot of fighting in D&D terms - 150+ rounds with no breaks in between. It never happens in game.
Last edited:
OldGreybeard
First Post
The 3/3.5 Edition states Wizards cannot wear armour so why is nerfedwizard even argueing about it, all i did was give some reasons why i believe this is so, to try and appease his warped sense of injustice, he has never understood the need for game balance and just wants to play the best possible character he can get away with, he has no intention of reading any book bar the PHB, so hasn`t even looked seriously at the Complete Wizard or any of the Prestige Classes, you can imagine the type of player he is, when he plays clerics who never cast cures on the other members of the party, he is therefore not a team player in any party.
NerfedWizard
First Post
OGB, how wrong you are - the 3/3.5 edition PHB lets wizards get feats giving the ability to wear progressively heavier types of armour, and Still Spell so that you can cast spells in full armour without penalty, IIRC [edit] I mean without spell failure chance - but you use higher level spell slots which majorly sucks [/edit]. Also the one time I ever played a cleric he was negative plane-aligned, and therefore healing the party would have been out of character - that is not a question of being a team player. But more to the point, the debate is not about what 3/3.5 edition rules say - it's about what we WANT the rules to say for your homebrew campaign. AND, I think a majority of people will agree with me when I say that at low levels (and at all times unless they use broken spell combinations using timestop or similar), [edit] 3.5 edition [/edit] wizards are vastly underpowered compared to clerics and druids [edit] so in other words please don't lecture me about game balance! [/edit].
[edit] note to moderators - OldGreyBeard and I are mates in real life so please don't worry if we rib each other a little on here, it's not meant rudely [/edit]
[edit] note to moderators - OldGreyBeard and I are mates in real life so please don't worry if we rib each other a little on here, it's not meant rudely [/edit]
Last edited:
WayneLigon
Adventurer
Heh. If he's all hung up on the exact specifics of fictional characters vs what a D&D class can accomplish, then he's always going to win. Almost nothing except D&D fanfic has exact parallels to D&D classes, mainly because most authors don't have to create artificial balancing nerfs to stop gamers from creating a be-all-and-end-all character.
(There's an interesting anecdote from the City of Heroes design team that directly applies here; originally CoH was designed with a much more open-ended power selection process. Then they saw what people with the 'gamer mindset' did. When given a choice of creating any character, they all created one character: the flying tank-mage that had the most optimized set of powers possible with the least restrictions)
The weird and silly limbo-dance of justifications as to why mages couldn't wear armor don't matter in the least; the only real restriction there is that the designer didn't want offensive firepower and always-on protection from damage in one package. Most other designers that were not directly trying to create a D&D rip-off have avoided that trap in other ways without the arbitrary restrictions.
The whole 'training' thing doesn't wash. If magic took years of book-learning to master, then how can I multiclass into Wizard in less than a week of game time? People have more than enough time in the day to learn more than one skill. Are all physicists and lawyers - both professions that require a load of study and book time - pale, skinny weaklings? Certainly not. Nor did it take them 30 years to master their professions.
(There's an interesting anecdote from the City of Heroes design team that directly applies here; originally CoH was designed with a much more open-ended power selection process. Then they saw what people with the 'gamer mindset' did. When given a choice of creating any character, they all created one character: the flying tank-mage that had the most optimized set of powers possible with the least restrictions)
The weird and silly limbo-dance of justifications as to why mages couldn't wear armor don't matter in the least; the only real restriction there is that the designer didn't want offensive firepower and always-on protection from damage in one package. Most other designers that were not directly trying to create a D&D rip-off have avoided that trap in other ways without the arbitrary restrictions.
The whole 'training' thing doesn't wash. If magic took years of book-learning to master, then how can I multiclass into Wizard in less than a week of game time? People have more than enough time in the day to learn more than one skill. Are all physicists and lawyers - both professions that require a load of study and book time - pale, skinny weaklings? Certainly not. Nor did it take them 30 years to master their professions.
NerfedWizard
First Post
Pale, skinny, weakling lawyers? Nothing to see here 
...
I mean I was skinny once, but not really so much any more...
though it may take me 30 years to master my profession when
I'm done (13 so far, not counting up to the end of high school,
and easily another 17 to go!!!)
...I mean I was skinny once, but not really so much any more...
though it may take me 30 years to master my profession when
I'm done (13 so far, not counting up to the end of high school,
and easily another 17 to go!!!)
Similar Threads
