Classes and Armor

[Dakhysron]

Actually, when I wrote that I was thinking of full plate. I guess my image of a magic-user is more along the lines of someone who has spent the greater part of their lives in books and are not very athletic. And a chain shirt is a little different than chain armor isn't it? I mean don't they have padded leather beneath the chain or something?

By the way, you CAN tell the players that they can get training. Training can be found over at the Keep. The player now has started multi-classing and is taking a level in Fighter.

[Dristram]

For my games, it has always been the restrictiveness of the armor is what hampers the magic-users arcane spell casting. I liked the 3e armor spell casting failure chance as it represented that for me. But I just accept the restrictions as the rules of the game just like OD&D and AD&D. The 3e spell casting failure chance is a good house rule to add IMO. The metal interfering with spell casting was always a Druid thing wasn't it?

[Grazzt]

Dristram wrote:
For my games, it has always been the restrictiveness of the armor is what hampers the magic-users arcane spell casting. I liked the 3e armor spell casting failure chance as it represented that for me. But I just accept the restrictions as the rules of the game just like OD&D and AD&D. The 3e spell casting failure chance is a good house rule to add IMO. The metal interfering with spell casting was always a Druid thing wasn't it?

We use this houserule in our game (the spell failure chance stuff from 3.x). We don't specifically forbid peeps from wearing "forbidden" armor, but with the penalties they get to attribute checks (skill check penalty in 3.x), spell failure, etc...they generally adhere to the RAW regarding armor.

Scott Greene

Necromancer Games

[Treebore]

Hi Scott! So are you actually playing C&C or just checking things out? Either way, good to "see" you over here.

[johns]

The armor question has brought to my mind the old non-proficiency penalty for using weapons. In AD&D there were different penalties for different classes - in 3E they just made it -4 for everyone. So, maybe there's an AC penalty for using armor for which you are not trained? In essence, the normal benefit of the armor is somewhat mitigated by your inability to use it effectively? Still sounds far-fetched, of course. The armor penalties Scott Greene mentioned are probably the better way to go.

Or maybe tell the party wizard he can cast spells in full plate, but only if all the NPC wizards get to do the same. That might put a damper on things.

[Grazzt]

Treebore wrote:
Hi Scott! So are you actually playing C&C or just checking things out? Either way, good to "see" you over here.

We (my gaming group) are actually playing it (and it looks like I'll probably be helping Casey write some stuff for it as well).

[Mac Golden]

The rule for a character wearing armor not on his class allowed list appears at the beginning of the classes in the introductory material at the end.