The ways of spellcasters

[Xen]

Hi! Someone explain to me why Druids/Clerics can cast spells while wearing armor and Mages/Sorcerers cannot. I assume that this is becuase Druids/Clerics pray to their God and Mages/Sorcerers drain energy from within theirselves.


So what is it then?

[ 05-29-2003, 04:09 PM: Message edited by: Xen ]

[Vedran]

Something from Player's Handbook:

Wizards cannot wear any armor, for several reasons. Firstly, most spells require complicated gestures and odd posturings by the caster and armor restricts the wearer's ability to do these properly. Secondly, the wizard spent his youth (and will spend most of his life) learning arcane languages, poring through old books, and practicing his spells. This leaves no time for learning other things (like how to wear armor properly and use it effectively). If the wizard had spent his time learning about armor, he would not have even the meager skills and powers he begins with. There are even unfounded theories that claim the materials in most armors disrupt the delicate fabric of a spell as it gathers energy; the two cannot exist side by side in harmony. While this idea is popular with the common people, true wizards know this is simply not true. If it were, how would they ever be able to cast spells requiring iron braziers or metal bowls?
For similar reasons, wizards are severely restricted in the weapons they can use. They are limited to those that are easy to learn or are sometimes useful in their own research. Hence, a wizard can use a dagger or a staff, items that are traditionally useful in magical studies. Other weapons allowed are darts, knives, and slings (weapons that require little skill, little strength, or both).

It says little about priests and armor, but their spells are effectively prayers, they don't have to be highly mobile as wizards do.

[IronDragon]

So you can learn arcane languages and complex rituals and dedicate years of your life to doing so buy you just can’t grasp the concept of ho to swing a sword.

Which of course leaves the question of just why sorcerers can’t spend their time and energy learning how to wear armor.

[Stratos]

Perhaps they could implement some kind of % spell failure casting spells while wearing armor. The heavier the armor, the greater spell failure ( no reason to let a mage run around in plate mail.) It could probably be done. They should be able to use a light leather armor without affecting the gestures and posturings. A stiff plate mail perhaps not, but a normal leather armor, yes.

[Mick the bard]

Leather armor is not like a leather jacket friend. It is rather stiff and restrictive; it would have to be in order to stop a weapon after all.

That does remind me however, I believe there was a penalty for using leather and chain on thieving skills with second edition rules. Then, again I haven't seen that rulebook in a few years.

[Stratos]

Yes, you are of course correct, but they shouldn´t be that restrictive. I mean how complicated are these gestures that a wizard can´t even wear a light armor while casting spells. Do you need to be a full fledged acrobat to use magic?

On the penalty to thieving skills while using armor issue, IIRC there is something written in the manual about it, though I haven´t checked if it´s used in the game. The restrictions on the kind of armor a plain thief can use can´t be too big and he would have high enough in his skills to counter any potential penalty.

[Nerull]

Originally posted by Stratos: Yes, you are of course correct, but they shouldn´t be that restrictive. I mean how complicated are these gestures that a wizard can´t even wear a light armor while casting spells. Do you need to be a full fledged acrobat to use magic?

That is one thing I like about 3rd edition rules. A wizard can use armor in those rules, but there are 2 restrictions:

1. They do not start with proficiency in its use. They can pick up that skill by taking levels in a class that allows armor or by using the "feats" they gain by gaining levels to get that proficiency. Same thing with longswords and other weapons.
2. There is a percentage chance (higher with the more bulky the armor is) that there will be spell failure. The chance of a wizard casting a spell in plate mail is pretty slim, since it is bulky and restrictive, but there is still a chance of them doing it correctly despite the limitations of the armor.

Unfortunately, the 2nd edition does not implement these rules. So your stuck with the weapon and armor restrictions (which make no sense in some ways; who says in your youth, before learning magic, that you didn't learn from your father to use a longsword?).

[Firestormalpha]

If mages need to perform different positions, stances and movements that are so complex to pull off a spell then why isn't there a Dex requirement for mages?

[Olorin]

Originally posted by Firestormalpha: If mages need to perform different positions, stances and movements that are so complex to pull off a spell then why isn't there a Dex requirement for mages?

That would make sense actually. How would a clutzy mage be able to cast any kind of spell if he kept dropping the spell components.

Just imagine casting acid arrow and dropping the components on your foot at the last moment...ooops, shot myself again...

[Merlin from Amber]

May be just after whole life reading, learning and casting they are just physicaly weak. What? It isn't easy to walk with 20-30 kg steel on you.

But for the light ones I really don't see any reason except for game balance. The wizard is strong against the art, therefor he must be weak to the fighters, because otherwise what will they do - they will remain weaker and nobody will like to play them.