Arcane Spell Falure [Archive] - Wizards Community

Arcane Spell Falure [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
MasonMurdoc
04-03-07, 10:27 AM I'm currently about to take part in a campaign where Multi-classing is prefered. I intended to be a Favoured Soul/Sorcorer, but I'm not sure what to do about teh spell falure of my Armour.
I asked to be A Warmage, but he didn't like it, so thats a no-go.
Is there a feat or something that could help with my problem?
We're 1st level btw
lancean
04-03-07, 10:43 AM So don't wear armor until you get to higher levels where you can buy mithril armor. At higher levels, you might also consider prestige classes that let you cast in armor better, such as Spellsword (complete warrior) or Abjurant Champion (complete mage). Until then, Mage Armor and mithril small shields are your friends!
MasonMurdoc
04-03-07, 01:11 PM Where can I get a Mithral small sheild?
I'm starting as a FAvoured Soul though
Toloran
04-03-07, 01:30 PM Where can I get a Mithral small sheild?
I'm starting as a FAvoured Soul though
I think he meant mithral light shield. The rules for them are in the DMG but the price for one would be 1009g (9 base +1000 for being mithral). It has an AC of +1, ACP of 0 and AFC of 0%.

Starting as a Favored Soul makes little difference, all it means is that you need to make sure to change over to mithral armor before taking sorcerer levels or else you'll suffer a penalty on your arcane spells (but not your divine spells).
MasonMurdoc
04-03-07, 08:48 PM My DM said he migh make a feat or me
But only if I roleplay getting it
Edymnion
04-03-07, 08:51 PM Mithril drops ASF by 10%.
Twilight drops ASF by 10%
Thistledown underpadding drops ASF by 5%.

That means you could have a +1 Twilight Thistledown Mithril Breastplate with 0% ASF.
Tonio
04-03-07, 08:58 PM Is it me, or is there a serious lack of cloth-"armored" divine classes in D&D? (Or mebbe I'm just lacking books?)

I mean, I understand the rationale behind the heavily armored cleric, fine... but where are the priestly casters? =/

If I'm just missing something (very likely, my D&D book collection isn't as complete as I'd like!), would someone please point it out? Especially since it'd synergize better with Sorcerer, for MasonMurdoc's character. :)

I know about the Shugenja... but that might be out (oriental class, for one). And it'd still be good to have more options!
Edymnion
04-03-07, 09:09 PM Is it me, or is there a serious lack of cloth-"armored" divine classes in D&D? (Or mebbe I'm just lacking books?)

I mean, I understand the rationale behind the heavily armored cleric, fine... but where are the priestly casters? =/Long story short, nobody would play them. The clerics started out as magic users, along with the wizards, without the armor. But nobody wanted to play them because they were too much of a support character and couldn't kill things. So, over the years, they just got more and more powerful, until you have what we see today. The Cleric power creep is still happening, btw, you only have to look at the recent introduction of "Divine Feats" that let you use your situationally useful Turning Attempts to gain combat power (in most cases).

And still most people won't touch the cleric with a 10' pole because they just think its a walking bandaid class.
Azezel
04-04-07, 11:22 AM Not True.

I am currently playing a Cleric/Favoured Soul who does not wear armour. Why? Simple - armour does not fit with my character's backstory. At no point was there an opertunity for my character to learn to wear armour, or a need to do so.

Someone I know has a Cleric/Bard who also doesn't wear armour, even though Bards can get away with Light armour. More or less the same reason why, it don't suit the character (Though this character does wear Bracers of Armour).

Just because a character can wear armour, does not mean they have to. Also, just because a character cannot wear armour does not meen you have to go whining to your DM for a feat that, and let's be honest, would make every arcane caster significantly more powerful from the get-go.

Long story short - you do not need armour to be an effective Sorcerer/Favoured Soul.
You do not need to wear armour just because you have the profficiencies.
On those occasions when higher AC is necessary (and if you play intelligently, it's pretty rare) You have spells such as Mage Armour, Shield, Shield of Faith, Sanctuary and god alone knows what else once you get a few levels under your belt. Not to mention Bracers of Armour, Animated Shields, Amulets of Natural Armour, Gloves of Desterity and Defending weapons.

Or you could just pick Sorcerer spells that don't have Somatic compnants...
Heahengel
04-04-07, 12:31 PM Is it me, or is there a serious lack of cloth-"armored" divine classes in D&D? (Or mebbe I'm just lacking books?)

I mean, I understand the rationale behind the heavily armored cleric, fine... but where are the priestly casters? =/

There is the Archivist from Heros of Horror. They are basically divine magic wizards (prayerbooks for their spells and such). I believe they aren't given armor proficiencies (although I could be wrong).
Elemental_Elf
04-04-07, 12:40 PM You realize studded leather only has a 15% chance of failure, right? Get out your d% and roll it a few times. You'll see that rolling a 15 or lower isn't that common. Just wear the armor. Seriously it won't kill you. Just remember that in non-combat situation you can remove your armor to cast a spell.
Tonio
04-04-07, 06:02 PM Long story short, nobody would play them. The clerics started out as magic users, along with the wizards, without the armor. But nobody wanted to play them because they were too much of a support character and couldn't kill things. So, over the years, they just got more and more powerful, until you have what we see today. The Cleric power creep is still happening, btw, you only have to look at the recent introduction of "Divine Feats" that let you use your situationally useful Turning Attempts to gain combat power (in most cases).

And still most people won't touch the cleric with a 10' pole because they just think its a walking bandaid class.

Regardless, if clerics are considered balanced, they'd stay balanced if you removed their armor and compensated for it somehow (more spells/day? better granted powers? whatever). If they're considered too much of a support character, then change that. Keep all the support spells, trade armor and melee for ranged/magic offense, or something else, whatever.

Not True.

I am currently playing a Cleric/Favoured Soul who does not wear armour. Why? Simple - armour does not fit with my character's backstory. At no point was there an opertunity for my character to learn to wear armour, or a need to do so.

Someone I know has a Cleric/Bard who also doesn't wear armour, even though Bards can get away with Light armour. More or less the same reason why, it don't suit the character (Though this character does wear Bracers of Armour).

Just because a character can wear armour, does not mean they have to. Also, just because a character cannot wear armour does not meen you have to go whining to your DM for a feat that, and let's be honest, would make every arcane caster significantly more powerful from the get-go.

Long story short - you do not need armour to be an effective Sorcerer/Favoured Soul.
You do not need to wear armour just because you have the profficiencies.
On those occasions when higher AC is necessary (and if you play intelligently, it's pretty rare) You have spells such as Mage Armour, Shield, Shield of Faith, Sanctuary and god alone knows what else once you get a few levels under your belt. Not to mention Bracers of Armour, Animated Shields, Amulets of Natural Armour, Gloves of Desterity and Defending weapons.

Or you could just pick Sorcerer spells that don't have Somatic compnants...

Well, you decided to forego one of your class's advantages for roleplaying reasons. That doesn't make it balanced. I could decide my wizard was so absentminded he'd always forget to buy/obtain spell components, and even memorize spells half the time... but that'd just make him a crappy, if fun to play, wizard. I'm sure you can handle not wearing armor just fine, but you are consciously refusing to use some of your character's abilities. What I'm calling for isn't the option to play a cleric without having to wear armor... it's for a class that's cleric-like but is balanced without armor. (Actually, it's arguable that the cleric is too powerful given his spells and his armor and melee... but that's another story.)
Azezel
04-04-07, 08:37 PM Tonio: I wasn't making a ballence arguemnt, and neither was the OP.

The OP wanted some way to wear armour and still cast Arcane spells with Somatic componants - and I pointed out that it was not necessary.

I am voluntarilly decreasing my combat effectiveness by not wearing armour. A Cleric/Sorcer has no option to Volunteer - he either decreases his effectiveness by not wearing armour, or by miscasting the occasional spell. My point still stands: The OP does not need to wear armour.

That said - if he is dead set on multiclassing Cleric with an Arcane class, and on wearing armour - he might consider the Bard, the Warlock, the Beguiler or the Duskblade (Not counting the Warmage which his DM dissalowed).

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
MasonMurdoc 04-03-07, 10:27 AM	I'm currently about to take part in a campaign where Multi-classing is prefered. I intended to be a Favoured Soul/Sorcorer, but I'm not sure what to do about teh spell falure of my Armour. I asked to be A Warmage, but he didn't like it, so thats a no-go. Is there a feat or something that could help with my problem? We're 1st level btw
lancean 04-03-07, 10:43 AM	So don't wear armor until you get to higher levels where you can buy mithril armor. At higher levels, you might also consider prestige classes that let you cast in armor better, such as Spellsword (complete warrior) or Abjurant Champion (complete mage). Until then, Mage Armor and mithril small shields are your friends!
MasonMurdoc 04-03-07, 01:11 PM	Where can I get a Mithral small sheild? I'm starting as a FAvoured Soul though
Toloran 04-03-07, 01:30 PM	Where can I get a Mithral small sheild? I'm starting as a FAvoured Soul though I think he meant mithral light shield. The rules for them are in the DMG but the price for one would be 1009g (9 base +1000 for being mithral). It has an AC of +1, ACP of 0 and AFC of 0%. Starting as a Favored Soul makes little difference, all it means is that you need to make sure to change over to mithral armor before taking sorcerer levels or else you'll suffer a penalty on your arcane spells (but not your divine spells).
MasonMurdoc 04-03-07, 08:48 PM	My DM said he migh make a feat or me But only if I roleplay getting it
Edymnion 04-03-07, 08:51 PM	Mithril drops ASF by 10%. Twilight drops ASF by 10% Thistledown underpadding drops ASF by 5%. That means you could have a +1 Twilight Thistledown Mithril Breastplate with 0% ASF.
Tonio 04-03-07, 08:58 PM	Is it me, or is there a serious lack of cloth-"armored" divine classes in D&D? (Or mebbe I'm just lacking books?) I mean, I understand the rationale behind the heavily armored cleric, fine... but where are the priestly casters? =/ If I'm just missing something (very likely, my D&D book collection isn't as complete as I'd like!), would someone please point it out? Especially since it'd synergize better with Sorcerer, for MasonMurdoc's character. :) I know about the Shugenja... but that might be out (oriental class, for one). And it'd still be good to have more options!
Edymnion 04-03-07, 09:09 PM	Is it me, or is there a serious lack of cloth-"armored" divine classes in D&D? (Or mebbe I'm just lacking books?) I mean, I understand the rationale behind the heavily armored cleric, fine... but where are the priestly casters? =/Long story short, nobody would play them. The clerics started out as magic users, along with the wizards, without the armor. But nobody wanted to play them because they were too much of a support character and couldn't kill things. So, over the years, they just got more and more powerful, until you have what we see today. The Cleric power creep is still happening, btw, you only have to look at the recent introduction of "Divine Feats" that let you use your situationally useful Turning Attempts to gain combat power (in most cases). And still most people won't touch the cleric with a 10' pole because they just think its a walking bandaid class.
Azezel 04-04-07, 11:22 AM	Not True. I am currently playing a Cleric/Favoured Soul who does not wear armour. Why? Simple - armour does not fit with my character's backstory. At no point was there an opertunity for my character to learn to wear armour, or a need to do so. Someone I know has a Cleric/Bard who also doesn't wear armour, even though Bards can get away with Light armour. More or less the same reason why, it don't suit the character (Though this character does wear Bracers of Armour). Just because a character can wear armour, does not mean they have to. Also, just because a character cannot wear armour does not meen you have to go whining to your DM for a feat that, and let's be honest, would make every arcane caster significantly more powerful from the get-go. Long story short - you do not need armour to be an effective Sorcerer/Favoured Soul. You do not need to wear armour just because you have the profficiencies. On those occasions when higher AC is necessary (and if you play intelligently, it's pretty rare) You have spells such as Mage Armour, Shield, Shield of Faith, Sanctuary and god alone knows what else once you get a few levels under your belt. Not to mention Bracers of Armour, Animated Shields, Amulets of Natural Armour, Gloves of Desterity and Defending weapons. Or you could just pick Sorcerer spells that don't have Somatic compnants...
Heahengel 04-04-07, 12:31 PM	Is it me, or is there a serious lack of cloth-"armored" divine classes in D&D? (Or mebbe I'm just lacking books?) I mean, I understand the rationale behind the heavily armored cleric, fine... but where are the priestly casters? =/ There is the Archivist from Heros of Horror. They are basically divine magic wizards (prayerbooks for their spells and such). I believe they aren't given armor proficiencies (although I could be wrong).
Elemental_Elf 04-04-07, 12:40 PM	You realize studded leather only has a 15% chance of failure, right? Get out your d% and roll it a few times. You'll see that rolling a 15 or lower isn't that common. Just wear the armor. Seriously it won't kill you. Just remember that in non-combat situation you can remove your armor to cast a spell.
Tonio 04-04-07, 06:02 PM	Long story short, nobody would play them. The clerics started out as magic users, along with the wizards, without the armor. But nobody wanted to play them because they were too much of a support character and couldn't kill things. So, over the years, they just got more and more powerful, until you have what we see today. The Cleric power creep is still happening, btw, you only have to look at the recent introduction of "Divine Feats" that let you use your situationally useful Turning Attempts to gain combat power (in most cases). And still most people won't touch the cleric with a 10' pole because they just think its a walking bandaid class. Regardless, if clerics are considered balanced, they'd stay balanced if you removed their armor and compensated for it somehow (more spells/day? better granted powers? whatever). If they're considered too much of a support character, then change that. Keep all the support spells, trade armor and melee for ranged/magic offense, or something else, whatever. Not True. I am currently playing a Cleric/Favoured Soul who does not wear armour. Why? Simple - armour does not fit with my character's backstory. At no point was there an opertunity for my character to learn to wear armour, or a need to do so. Someone I know has a Cleric/Bard who also doesn't wear armour, even though Bards can get away with Light armour. More or less the same reason why, it don't suit the character (Though this character does wear Bracers of Armour). Just because a character can wear armour, does not mean they have to. Also, just because a character cannot wear armour does not meen you have to go whining to your DM for a feat that, and let's be honest, would make every arcane caster significantly more powerful from the get-go. Long story short - you do not need armour to be an effective Sorcerer/Favoured Soul. You do not need to wear armour just because you have the profficiencies. On those occasions when higher AC is necessary (and if you play intelligently, it's pretty rare) You have spells such as Mage Armour, Shield, Shield of Faith, Sanctuary and god alone knows what else once you get a few levels under your belt. Not to mention Bracers of Armour, Animated Shields, Amulets of Natural Armour, Gloves of Desterity and Defending weapons. Or you could just pick Sorcerer spells that don't have Somatic compnants... Well, you decided to forego one of your class's advantages for roleplaying reasons. That doesn't make it balanced. I could decide my wizard was so absentminded he'd always forget to buy/obtain spell components, and even memorize spells half the time... but that'd just make him a crappy, if fun to play, wizard. I'm sure you can handle not wearing armor just fine, but you are consciously refusing to use some of your character's abilities. What I'm calling for isn't the option to play a cleric without having to wear armor... it's for a class that's cleric-like but is balanced without armor. (Actually, it's arguable that the cleric is too powerful given his spells and his armor and melee... but that's another story.)
Azezel 04-04-07, 08:37 PM	Tonio: I wasn't making a ballence arguemnt, and neither was the OP. The OP wanted some way to wear armour and still cast Arcane spells with Somatic componants - and I pointed out that it was not necessary. I am voluntarilly decreasing my combat effectiveness by not wearing armour. A Cleric/Sorcer has no option to Volunteer - he either decreases his effectiveness by not wearing armour, or by miscasting the occasional spell. My point still stands: The OP does not need to wear armour. That said - if he is dead set on multiclassing Cleric with an Arcane class, and on wearing armour - he might consider the Bard, the Warlock, the Beguiler or the Duskblade (Not counting the Warmage which his DM dissalowed).