Heavy armour

Tandria · Post by **Tandria** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:33 pm

Recently I've noticed somewhat of an influx in wizards wearing heavy armour (i.e., platemail of different metals). Is there a chance more of a penalty could be added to casting in this kind of armour? I can't see a wizard still being able to cast almost normally with a titanium helm and a breastplate on.

Bugoron · Post by **Bugoron** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 8:17 pm

I agree with Tandria's statements. A spellcaster with any amount of heavy armour on should be penalized severely in their casting, as casting is supposed to be a very precise and difficult procedure, even for the simplest of spells. Gauntletted hands couldn't possibly gesture as nimbly as bare hands or hands in leather gloves, and suits of plate are going to heavilly restrict most movement in regards to the upper and lower torso.

Perhaps an increase in the percent chance of spell failure, and even a removal of a rank of the armor proficiency feat, supposing a wizard starts with any, I can't rightly remember off the top of my head, forgive me. I do, agrre with Tandria, though, that something should be done, as it seems that the problem is only getting worse and not better.

Kregor · Post by **Kregor** » Tue Jan 24, 2006 3:45 am

Wizards start with none, and have to buy up even to be proficient in leather armour.

I have not seen a heavy armour clad wizard myself, but personally, I think its ludicrous. Even a multiclassed fighter/wizard in AD&D couldn't wear heavy armour and be able to cast a spell.

Granted, tabletop offers items like cloaks, rings and bracers to make up for what wizards lack in armour-wise, but it's still a disadvantage that you have to find said items, and it's a tradeoff for being able to cast spells of the power that a wizard can do.

Forget penalties, a wizard in heavy armour shouldn't be able to cast at all. Druids are expected to RP an inability to wear metal armour, wizards should be expected to RP that they couldn't possibly manage the mechanics of the art in platemail.

Nearraba · Post by **Nearraba** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:46 pm

I totally agree, Kregor makes an excellent point.

Druids are expected to RP an inability to wear metal armour, wizards should be expected to RP that they couldn't possibly manage the mechanics of the art in platemail.

Having my own wizard, I think of it as trying to picture myself in the real situation, making a picture in my head.

How would you be able to move around casting spells and such with heavy armour on? There are robes and other clothing made especially for wizards that you can find icly, and some even have enchantments on them.

Theillik · Post by **Theillik** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:53 pm

I agree with Tandria - whole heartedly.

A prerequisite for wizards is a high dexterity. Wear ANY armour, and that dexterity is reduced, in a manner proportional to the weight and inflexibility of the armour.

A wizard has extreme difficulty to access material components while wearing armour. A wizard has extreme difficulty to fulfill the strenuous amount of somatic components while wearing armour.

Also, I think that the only exception to this rule, would be using the metaphysical feat of Still Spell. Though, the difficulty in using material components would still be present while wearing armour.

Imagine chanting a spell for a full round - most spells require the wizard to chant for a full round, hence the reason for "lost concentration.

In addition to the verbal component of chanting, the wizard has a material component - this is not so simple as to pick up the component and cast it - the wizard must using the material component along with the somatic component. For example, chanting while making a circle of blood to summon a demon.

In addition to the verbal and material components, the wizard must complete somatic components. For example, dancing, wild waving of the arms, detailed patterns with the hands, body, legs, arm, head.

Spells are not as simple as pulling an item from your pouch, lifting you hand to point at the target, and saying a couple of words. Great concentration, time, and free movement are necessary.

Llanthyr · Post by **Llanthyr** » Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:46 am

Still spell may be able to circumvent this. I remember using still spell for my armored sorcerer in NWN

Ceara · Post by **Ceara** » Wed Aug 30, 2006 1:13 pm

I have to agree, I think it's very poor form and poor rp if nothing else for a wizard to be wearing metal armour. I was shocked that so many wear leather, back in the day you could only wear silk. I think they can wear it but shouldn't be able to cast in it as an arcane spellcaster. Soft or supple leather I can see, hardened leather or above should be avoided. Wizards have defensive spells to make up for this. However, having a wizard myself it is nearly impossible to find silk that doesn't scrap during one or two battles. Perhaps a shop or merchant could sell some stronger silk?

Scylere · Post by **Scylere** » Wed Aug 30, 2006 2:45 pm

While this is brought to the surface again...Lathander said that still spell MAY be able to circumvent this. Is that a definite thing now? Has still spell enabled wizards to circumvent the armour penalty?

Alaudrien · Post by **Alaudrien** » Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:04 pm

I agree totally with what people said previously. You'd think a wizard wearing big clunky platemail with a shock barrier up would wind up being shocked by his own spells. The only armour I have ever heard or seen a wizard wearing was light chainmail and they where battlemages at that. Hmm what was it that was said if you can do it doesnt mean you should do it? haha Well..just my 2 cents.

Kelemvor · Post by **Kelemvor** » Wed Aug 30, 2006 8:06 pm

Scylere - just to clarify your question. It was Llanthyr who posted about still spell and not Lathander.

Still Spell allows a spell to be cast without the somatic component - the arcane finger wiggling. This means that a caster can use a spell without having to free their hands of weapons or books, or in an extreme case means they can cast even if they've lost both arms.

The Still Spell feat in Neverwinter Nights does indeed reduce or remove armour penalties when casting. However, that is a 3rd edition consequence that I do not believe has been coded here.

Amalia · Post by **Amalia** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 6:26 am

Perhaps I'm an elitist, but it makes me cringe to think of wizards in *any* armor. My wizard fights a lot of things naked because she knows her clothing will just get destroyed in a few hits, but even though the one time I had armor on without realizing I didn't have a single spell fail, I have unilaterally refused to armor my wizard. The *idea* of an arcane spellcaster is a character that's physically vulnerable and magically deadly. Throw in armor, and the whole concept goes akimbo. I'll grant, I'd like to see archmages able to enchant items as a result of working harder and longer than bards work on books-- but even without that possibility, I'd really like to see wizards not wear armor, ever, if they plan to do any spellcasting.

Selveem · Post by **Selveem** » Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:53 pm

Amalia wrote:Perhaps I'm an elitist, but it makes me cringe to think of wizards in *any* armor. My wizard fights a lot of things naked because she knows her clothing will just get destroyed in a few hits, but even though the one time I had armor on without realizing I didn't have a single spell fail, I have unilaterally refused to armor my wizard. The *idea* of an arcane spellcaster is a character that's physically vulnerable and magically deadly. Throw in armor, and the whole concept goes akimbo. I'll grant, I'd like to see archmages able to enchant items as a result of working harder and longer than bards work on books-- but even without that possibility, I'd really like to see wizards not wear armor, ever, if they plan to do any spellcasting.

Selling tickets for Amalia fighting in the arena!

Zilvryn · Post by **Zilvryn** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 12:31 pm

You don't have to armour your mage in -armour- to get the AC benefits either, there are plenty of +AC items in game (for most of the wear locations) not to mention all the spells wizards gain. Naturally you run across these as you become more powerful and explore more areas, which is as it should be. You wouldn't see a level 5 mage in tabletop with several items of protections (ring/cloak/etc).. Clearly some people have seen fit to sidestep this by wearing heavy armour.

Eh, I was going somewhere with this, but i've lost my train of thought. So, suffice to say that yes, wearing armour is poor form. I think that's what I was trying to say..

Belose · Post by **Belose** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 10:29 pm

As I only have 2nd edition materials, mostly..I always thought wizards could wear leather armor, but not be as good at spellcasting for it. Then I remembered it was PADDED armor.. or was it padded leather? I think it was just plain padded...but I keep wondering about character creation. Maybe while learning what your chosen class can do, it would help if your chosen class was clothed in plain protective material accordingly. This will help you figure out what to wear when you GET some coin. If newly created characters get clothed in the protective gear they should be wearing when they go adventuring after graduation, I think it would be a big help... though it means I'll need to take a refresher course.. I have no idea what low level wizards can wear and still make it to level 11.

Leohand · Post by **Leohand** » Sun Feb 25, 2007 12:30 am

My wizards wear silk, with one exception. I have a wizard that owns a bracer that he bought at the school of wonders, which they only sell to wizards. I assume, therefore, that wizards are ic aloud to were heavy bracers and no more.

I like the way Baldur's Gate 2 did it. I had a multi-class fighter/rogue. He couldn't use his theif skills if he wore anything heavier then leather. Wizards couldn't cast at all if you put them in the wrong armor.

Hviti · Post by **Hviti** » Sun Feb 25, 2007 12:39 am

Leohand wrote:My wizards wear silk, with one exception. I have a wizard that owns a bracer that he bought at the school of wonders, which they only sell to wizards. I assume, therefore, that wizards are ic aloud to were heavy bracers and no more.

Actually, I kind of wonder about this...both the school of wonder and at least 1 guild sell bracers that examine as heavy armor (and are made of metal). Why would these shops, which sell only to wizards, sell such items?

Dalvyn · Post by **Dalvyn** » Sun Feb 25, 2007 1:15 am

They should be bracelets, not bracers... Bracelets do not count as armour, but do not protect either.

Feel free to send a mail to builders@forgottenkingdoms.com (well, dalvyn@gmail.com for now) indicating where those shops that need to be fixed are.

The fix for the School of Wonder is already on its way (and just requires an area update).

Leohand · Post by **Leohand** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 2:21 am

Dalvyn wrote:They should be bracelets, not bracers... Bracelets do not count as armour, but do not protect either.

Feel free to send a mail to builders@forgottenkingdoms.com (well, dalvyn@gmail.com for now) indicating where those shops that need to be fixed are.

The fix for the School of Wonder is already on its way (and just requires an area update).

Well, you fixed the bracer thing I see, lol. I checked the price on the bracelets though, and they are so much cheaper. Not that I'm preasuring you of anything, I'm just wondering if since you know I had one before the update, if there was the possibility of getting reimpurse in some way. Again, I am willing to take the loss if that's the decision and all that, but, yeah, no harm in asking. I think the 'Bracers were like 28 platinum, and now the bracelets are like 2 gold and change.

Heavy armour

Heavy armour

On second thought..