Armored Casting [Archive] - Wizards Community

Armored Casting [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Otto the Bugbear
06-23-06, 12:50 PM As I’ve mentioned before, I’ve been going full bore with making changes to the game. The Mage and Druid in my sig are prime examples of how radical some of these changes are. One of the things that I’ve been looking at, and changing heavily, is spellcasting. This close scrutiny coupled with the fiction I’ve read, games I’ve played, and friends I’ve talked to, have all come converged to bring about these changes. I’m posting this here instead of the magic or equipment forums because it’ll affect all the casting classes.

Something that’s bothered me is the excuse about armor when it comes to the difference between divine casters and arcane casters, specifically armored casting. I don’t want to open a can of worms, so let me just state that it’s MY feeling that the reasoning behind divine = armor ok and arcane = armor not is retarded. The reasoning given always feels contrived to me when I read it. It feels more like legacy rules that are carried over because they’re legacy rules. And this is from a guy who would always rather play a cleric or druid than a wizard or sorcerer (though I’d rather play melee guy than either of those two). Certainly, armored casting is one of the things often brought up about why divine casters seem more powerful than arcane casters.

So, what I’ve decided to do is change the way armor interacts with all spellcasting. Some classes will be granted armored casting of various strengths. Some classes will depend entirely on other circumstances (like a war cleric gets armored casting, while pacifist cleric does not.) In addition, this means that the percentage mechanic is changed to a d20 roll. Without going into a great amount of detail about the individual classes, I wanted to see what your opinions on this matter were.

So, here’s the write up.

Armor of any type interferes with a caster’s magical gestures, which can cause his spells with somatic components to fail. Armor does not interfere with spells that have no somatic components, or those cast using the Still Spell metamagic feat. In order to cast a spell while wearing armor, a caster must make a caster level check, DC 15. He applies the armor’s spell failure chance to this roll to determine success or failure. Spell Failure is found on table SF-1: Spell Failure, below. These numbers roughly convert Arcane Spell Failure chance found for armors in supplements by dividing the percentage chance by 5. That is to say that each 5% of Arcane Spell Failure is equivalent to –1 on this caster check. Because of the changes being made to shields, they now impose a spell failure penalty that differs from the conversion listed above.

The armored casting feats reduce the Spell Failure penalty by –2 for Light Armored Casting, -4 for Medium Armored Casting, or –6 for Heavy Armored Casting.

A character with 5 or more ranks in Spellcraft gets a +2 synergy bonus to this caster level check :credit: wolfie-kun

Light Armor : Spell Failure
Padded : -1
Leather : -2
Studded Leather : -3
Chain Shirt : -4
Medium Armor
Hide : -4
Scale Mail : -5
Chain Mail : -6
Breast Plate : -5
Heavy Armor
Splint Mail : -8
Banded Mail : -7
Half Plate : -8
Full Plate : -7
Shields
Buckler : -2
Light Shield : -3
Heavy Shield : -4
Tower Shield : -10

Now, it should be noted that I’ll also be ruling that caster level may not exceed ECL.

So, share your opinion.

Cheers

Otto :)
CzarGarrett
06-23-06, 01:02 PM Seems a little complicated.

I've seen some version that was along the lines of:

Armored Arcana
required- cast 4th level arcane
get- 5% ASF reduction

Improved Armored Arcana
required- cast 8th level arcane, Armored Arcana
get- additional 5% ASF reduction (total 10%)

Which is the way I've used it once or twice in some of my games.
Elemental_Master
06-23-06, 01:27 PM Its calles mithril.

Arcane spell failure should = armor check penalty * 5%.

But those feats don't sound good.

Spell sword is another way to get out of it.

A wizard with say a +5 mithril chain has a armor bonus of 9 and add that to a heavy shield u got +16 to his armor class making him better than a fighter.

Heck the izard could just spend his exp to upgrade it himself.

But yeah Cleric sacrifes a huge amount of spell power for that armor. But knowing every spell on list is unfair...
Otto the Bugbear
06-23-06, 07:18 PM Seems a little complicated.

I don't understand.

The armor record on character sheets already has a place for Arcane Spell Failure. Just put this in it's place.

Wearing armor?

d20 + caster level - spell failure v. DC 15.

Doesn't seem any more complicated than, ferinstance, combat.

Its calles mithril.

Arcane spell failure should = armor check penalty * 5%.

But those feats don't sound good.

Spell sword is another way to get out of it.

A wizard with say a +5 mithril chain has a armor bonus of 9 and add that to a heavy shield u got +16 to his armor class making him better than a fighter.

Heck the izard could just spend his exp to upgrade it himself.

But yeah Cleric sacrifes a huge amount of spell power for that armor. But knowing every spell on list is unfair...

Was this to me, or to Czar? It's hard to tell which one you're commenting about.

Anyone else? Any more input?

Cheers

Otto :)
wolfie-kun
06-23-06, 07:26 PM I'd say the DC should be 20, not 15. After all, very few casters are at all trained to cast in armor, and a DC 15 check doesn't represent all too much training.

Also, I'd let having 5 ranks in Spellcraft grant a +2 synergy bonus to the check.
Otto the Bugbear
06-24-06, 02:13 PM I'd say the DC should be 20, not 15. After all, very few casters are at all trained to cast in armor, and a DC 15 check doesn't represent all too much training.

Also, I'd let having 5 ranks in Spellcraft grant a +2 synergy bonus to the check.

I didn't want to make it too hard. Even with the feats invested, and the special materials armor, it's still going to require a roll. I'm going to run this by some of my friends tonight, and I'll bring the DC 20 v. DC 15 suggestion to see what they think.

The synergy bonus is golden. That's getting added.

Thanks wolfie.

Anyone else with thoughts about this?

Cheers

Otto :)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Otto the Bugbear 06-23-06, 12:50 PM	As I’ve mentioned before, I’ve been going full bore with making changes to the game. The Mage and Druid in my sig are prime examples of how radical some of these changes are. One of the things that I’ve been looking at, and changing heavily, is spellcasting. This close scrutiny coupled with the fiction I’ve read, games I’ve played, and friends I’ve talked to, have all come converged to bring about these changes. I’m posting this here instead of the magic or equipment forums because it’ll affect all the casting classes. Something that’s bothered me is the excuse about armor when it comes to the difference between divine casters and arcane casters, specifically armored casting. I don’t want to open a can of worms, so let me just state that it’s MY feeling that the reasoning behind divine = armor ok and arcane = armor not is retarded. The reasoning given always feels contrived to me when I read it. It feels more like legacy rules that are carried over because they’re legacy rules. And this is from a guy who would always rather play a cleric or druid than a wizard or sorcerer (though I’d rather play melee guy than either of those two). Certainly, armored casting is one of the things often brought up about why divine casters seem more powerful than arcane casters. So, what I’ve decided to do is change the way armor interacts with all spellcasting. Some classes will be granted armored casting of various strengths. Some classes will depend entirely on other circumstances (like a war cleric gets armored casting, while pacifist cleric does not.) In addition, this means that the percentage mechanic is changed to a d20 roll. Without going into a great amount of detail about the individual classes, I wanted to see what your opinions on this matter were. So, here’s the write up. Armor of any type interferes with a caster’s magical gestures, which can cause his spells with somatic components to fail. Armor does not interfere with spells that have no somatic components, or those cast using the Still Spell metamagic feat. In order to cast a spell while wearing armor, a caster must make a caster level check, DC 15. He applies the armor’s spell failure chance to this roll to determine success or failure. Spell Failure is found on table SF-1: Spell Failure, below. These numbers roughly convert Arcane Spell Failure chance found for armors in supplements by dividing the percentage chance by 5. That is to say that each 5% of Arcane Spell Failure is equivalent to –1 on this caster check. Because of the changes being made to shields, they now impose a spell failure penalty that differs from the conversion listed above. The armored casting feats reduce the Spell Failure penalty by –2 for Light Armored Casting, -4 for Medium Armored Casting, or –6 for Heavy Armored Casting. A character with 5 or more ranks in Spellcraft gets a +2 synergy bonus to this caster level check :credit: wolfie-kun Light Armor : Spell Failure Padded : -1 Leather : -2 Studded Leather : -3 Chain Shirt : -4 Medium Armor Hide : -4 Scale Mail : -5 Chain Mail : -6 Breast Plate : -5 Heavy Armor Splint Mail : -8 Banded Mail : -7 Half Plate : -8 Full Plate : -7 Shields Buckler : -2 Light Shield : -3 Heavy Shield : -4 Tower Shield : -10 Now, it should be noted that I’ll also be ruling that caster level may not exceed ECL. So, share your opinion. Cheers Otto :)
CzarGarrett 06-23-06, 01:02 PM	Seems a little complicated. I've seen some version that was along the lines of: Armored Arcana required- cast 4th level arcane get- 5% ASF reduction Improved Armored Arcana required- cast 8th level arcane, Armored Arcana get- additional 5% ASF reduction (total 10%) Which is the way I've used it once or twice in some of my games.
Elemental_Master 06-23-06, 01:27 PM	Its calles mithril. Arcane spell failure should = armor check penalty * 5%. But those feats don't sound good. Spell sword is another way to get out of it. A wizard with say a +5 mithril chain has a armor bonus of 9 and add that to a heavy shield u got +16 to his armor class making him better than a fighter. Heck the izard could just spend his exp to upgrade it himself. But yeah Cleric sacrifes a huge amount of spell power for that armor. But knowing every spell on list is unfair...
Otto the Bugbear 06-23-06, 07:18 PM	Seems a little complicated. I don't understand. The armor record on character sheets already has a place for Arcane Spell Failure. Just put this in it's place. Wearing armor? d20 + caster level - spell failure v. DC 15. Doesn't seem any more complicated than, ferinstance, combat. Its calles mithril. Arcane spell failure should = armor check penalty * 5%. But those feats don't sound good. Spell sword is another way to get out of it. A wizard with say a +5 mithril chain has a armor bonus of 9 and add that to a heavy shield u got +16 to his armor class making him better than a fighter. Heck the izard could just spend his exp to upgrade it himself. But yeah Cleric sacrifes a huge amount of spell power for that armor. But knowing every spell on list is unfair... Was this to me, or to Czar? It's hard to tell which one you're commenting about. Anyone else? Any more input? Cheers Otto :)
wolfie-kun 06-23-06, 07:26 PM	I'd say the DC should be 20, not 15. After all, very few casters are at all trained to cast in armor, and a DC 15 check doesn't represent all too much training. Also, I'd let having 5 ranks in Spellcraft grant a +2 synergy bonus to the check.
Otto the Bugbear 06-24-06, 02:13 PM	I'd say the DC should be 20, not 15. After all, very few casters are at all trained to cast in armor, and a DC 15 check doesn't represent all too much training. Also, I'd let having 5 ranks in Spellcraft grant a +2 synergy bonus to the check. I didn't want to make it too hard. Even with the feats invested, and the special materials armor, it's still going to require a roll. I'm going to run this by some of my friends tonight, and I'll bring the DC 20 v. DC 15 suggestion to see what they think. The synergy bonus is golden. That's getting added. Thanks wolfie. Anyone else with thoughts about this? Cheers Otto :)