Wizard in armor and two handed sword, what's the drawback?

[Jarmo]

I see what you are saying, but then can't that just be accomplished by concentrating on increasing said physical stats as opposed to something intrinsic? Maybe at first warriors can have a HP bonus, or there could be a background choice that gives a bonus to HP (local militia training) or some such.

 

The way I like to think about it is "magical thing happens".

 

Through experience, one learns to conjure up balls of flame with the power of his mind,

the other learns to hide like shadow, passing right before observers eyes without detection, walking through a floor of broken glass without making a sound,

the third hits like a wrecking ball and can literally take an axe strike right in the face without flinching.

 

Magical reality, laws of nature dont apply the same way as here in mundania.

[curryinahurry]

I hate the idea of HP determined by class. That stupid idea needs to die in a fire.

i dont see the problem... a warrior is obviously more resistant to blows than a thief or a mage since he is trained to be in the thick of it

 

Yes, but this could be handled by having similar base hit points and giving larger bonuses to strength, constitution, etc. as the greater determinant. This also gives greater flexibility to character builds.

[Hypevosa]

I hate the idea of HP determined by class. That stupid idea needs to die in a fire.

 

It's an abstract. Your body has its basic ability to take damage (constitution) and the HP gain per class level is meant to be representative of the kind of training or experience you likely had. If you're a fighter and you level, chances are you've been getting hit alot more often than the wizard who leveled and was mainly just looking at books the whole time.

 

I see what you are saying, but then can't that just be accomplished by concentrating on increasing said physical stats as opposed to something intrinsic? Maybe at first warriors can have a HP bonus, or there could be a background choice that gives a bonus to HP (local militia training) or some such.

 

As an aside, it cracks me up how many names I keep seeing from the Bioware boards over here now, my tag was Rylor Tormtor over there and I didn't post much in general, but it is nice to see the same names and people give good input over here.

 

It's not really a physical stat though - while your body's ability to heal or take damage before becoming useful is certainly a physical stat, your ability to ignore pain or work around existing wounds to still be at full capacity are very much a matter of experience. D&D has 0 hp as disabled, you're not dead really but you've finally reached the point where further extraneous effort will throw you into shock and you'll begin dying. You're finally to the point where your body has been beaten up to a point you can no longer work with or ignore.

[teknoman2]

you may also think of hp not as the actual health of the character but as his physical endurance. the warrior is not actually hit by the enemy when he loses hp, but he blocks a potentially lethal blow by making it hit his armor at the wrong angle, avoiding penetration and getting tired by the effort, and when he reaches 0 hp, means that he no longer has the strength to stop the enemy's attack and gets a direct hit that kills him

the thief is better at evading, but not as good as the warrior at using his armor for stoping attacks that get through his defence, therefore he gets tired faster when hit and drops exausted ready to be killed long before a warrior

a mage with light armor and no magical defence has low hp because the hits that connect with his armor but dont get through hurt more than if they had hit a metal armor, making him lose his strength to stand and fight faster than the rest.

so you can simulate these with making each have a different amount of hp and get the same damage per hit, or they all have the same hp, but depending on the armor and stats, they get more or less damage per hit

[Macbeth]

I suppose while you may get armor, that doesn't mean your health is on par with the guy used to being bled on a regular basis - and that you aren't going to be doing anywhere near the amount of damage, etc. Just because you can use the sword doesn't mean you excel with it.

 

Exactly. The warrior should normally be able to perform skills with his weapon the wizard can’t and in the very least he’ll do a lot more damage; that’s a given.

 

As for plate mails and the like, it’s all about give and take. A wizard will be better protected in a full-blown armour, but I would assume (s)he misses the magical benefits inherent to certain robes – or something along those lines.

[Caerdon]

Returning to the original topic...

 

I assume the drawback of a wizard with armor and two-handed swords is that he has to spend skill points in both wizardly and soldierly skills instead of just one or the other. And of crouse, like some have mentioned, a huge weapon and a heavy armor might hamper your spellcasting to some degree, depending on how the system works.

[Lady Evenstar]

I hate the idea of HP determined by class. That stupid idea needs to die in a fire.

 

It's an abstract. Your body has its basic ability to take damage (constitution) and the HP gain per class level is meant to be representative of the kind of training or experience you likely had. If you're a fighter and you level, chances are you've been getting hit alot more often than the wizard who leveled and was mainly just looking at books the whole time.

 

I'd much prefer that it be left to the player to decide how much to invest in each stat. Every magic user needn't be studious and weedy. Of course every point allocated to one attribute is unavailable for assignment to another--and the weedy wizard may well be more powerful, if less versatile than the battlemage--but I see no reason not to let the player roleplay a beefy mage if they want.

[Valorian]

I hope they do something sensible with heavy armor.

Like you're easier to hit, even if you absorb more damage because heavy armor hinders your movement. And spend more resources (stamina,mana) to use your abilities/cast spells.

 

And a strength requirement to wear heavy armor would be nice too.

[Umberlin]

I think that depends on the type of Mage, if the Wizards in your setting are only powerful by way of study and tedious research then that says one thing. Settings that place intelligence as little more than a measure of magical damage and/or magical resource annoy me in their own right though.

[Halberd]

I'd imagine the drawback would be that the two handed sword armoured wizard wouldn't be as powerful in any of those talents as he would if he only focused on one of them.

 

He wouldn't have as large of a variety as a pure wizard and he wouldn't have the same skill in combat as a pure fighter/warrior.

 

We don't know the levelling system will be yet.

[ledroc]

As long as it's somehow balanced I don't have a problem with it. So your strength designates your carrying capacity and your armor counts against that.

 

so if you chose to play a character that has a high strength, wears plate armor but casts spells, great but his/her spells shouldn't be as powerful as someone that has a higher relative "intelligence" or whatever the spell casting stat of the day is.

 

There needs to be a trade off, otherwise all your party would be spell blasting plate wearing fools

[Ashram]

I like this...especially if under the wizard class you have the ability to go down a channeling type of progression like Duskblade in DnD. Perhaps smaller spell selection, but able to use spells in your attacks. Would be pretty awesome variation to the Wiz.

[Hypevosa]

I hate the idea of HP determined by class. That stupid idea needs to die in a fire.

 

It's an abstract. Your body has its basic ability to take damage (constitution) and the HP gain per class level is meant to be representative of the kind of training or experience you likely had. If you're a fighter and you level, chances are you've been getting hit alot more often than the wizard who leveled and was mainly just looking at books the whole time.

 

I'd much prefer that it be left to the player to decide how much to invest in each stat. Every magic user needn't be studious and weedy. Of course every point allocated to one attribute is unavailable for assignment to another--and the weedy wizard may well be more powerful, if less versatile than the battlemage--but I see no reason not to let the player roleplay a beefy mage if they want.

 

Put points in constitution then - you can still be beefy, but it cannot be helped what your character has and has not experienced in order to "level". Wizards naturally don't focus on learning to take more damage and deal with wounds like a warrior does nearly every combat.

Edited October 4, 2012 by Hypevosa

[silverjace]

I think like some people have stated, the tradeoff will be you will be less specialized and therefore less effective overall. A wizard would have to put points in intelligence to cast his spells effectively, constitution to survive and strength to be able to use the heavy armor and greatsword. That makes you a bit less effective in combat than if you just went intelligence and a bit of constitution or a warrior that has strength and constitution.

[FlintlockJazz]

I can't wait for my full plate wearing rogue to sneak up behind the enemy and backstab them with my claymore..

 

Edit to add: I've never seen a D&D crpg that allowed you to cast "Silence" on a rogue so he could sneak around without being heard, regardless of how much noise he makes within his bubble.

 

That would be awesome. As to the spell, yeah I would like to see that too in a CRPG. It's definitely doable in tabletop, GURPS has a spell called Hush that silences Mages so they can't cast spells and no one under it's effects can talk but at the same time they gain bonuses to stealth for having all noise from them removed and automatically win against hearing challenges (there's then a more advanced spell that lets the caster speak and cast at will while under those same effects). There's also an area of effec Silence spell that removes all sound from an area which means that the mage can silence a room and have the party then pile in and slaughter everyone in a really messy and loud way without the guys in the next room hearing a thing, useful for a frontal approach that still requires some subtlety.

[wolfing]

I don't think the OP is seeking if there's a drawback in being a wizard instead of fighter,

but if there's a drawback in wizard wearing armor vs wizard wearing the usual pajamas.

Exactly, one thing is "it's doable if you want" and another thing is "it's optimal". So my point is, there should be benefits and penalties attached to each type of armor (light, medium, heavy) so yes, your mage can wear platemail, but platemail's drawback of having a 25% chance of spell failure makes it not ideal for a mage to wear (unless he/she can't cast spells maybe). Same as rogues on platemail, maybe it has a penalty for sneaking (because it's noisy) and 'sneak attack' chance (because you can't hit as precisely as in leather or cloth).

 

This is what I want the devs to clarify if possible.

Edited October 6, 2012 by wolfing

[DocDoomII]

I doubt that as soon as your wizard is 'born' he can wear a set of full plate armor. I could be that wearing armor is a feat that can be unlock through leveling, and by doing so you spent a point in there that could have been used in something more magic oriented.

This can be a starting point.

[Lady Evenstar]

I don't see a need for plate to trigger spell failure. The issue with plate can be the same for all classes: weight and speed vs. protection. High strength levels or feats could partially negate the disadvantages, but characters whose fighting style requires high levels of mobility and who lack a gap closer like charge probably aren't going to choose it. Of course if high level mages get a teleport spell that could affect their choice, but I'd expect it to be chose more often by "melee mages" who use buff and touch damage spells to supplement an otherwise under-developed melee repertoire.

 

Perhaps this is a good place to add that I've been a little concerned that I'd like the combat system not to be D&D tweaked just enough to avoid a lawsuit from WotC, but truly its own, based on principles of balance, fun, and support of interesting tactics. Obviously, other systems will serve as points of reference, but I've been a little startled by player conservatism.

[Zeful]

See, here is something we can agree about. HPs should be standard modified by stats, in my opinion. Spend more on endurance/constitution or whatever, more health. I suppose they could have a health stat, where you could invest directly into your health pool. I am not such a fan of that particular approach thought.

Except this has the issue of either making all combat too lethal, or not lethal enough. Differential HP based on class allows for character archetypes that need active protection and increase the tactical options in a fight. The only way your system would work with that in mind is to make spellcasting require multiple very high stats, reduce the ability for your strong character to carry everything by fixing the number of things each character is capable of carrying, such that investing in HP to equal the mundane classes compromises your ability to do something important.

[Umberlin]

I doubt that as soon as your wizard is 'born' he can wear a set of full plate armor. I could be that wearing armor is a feat that can be unlock through leveling, and by doing so you spent a point in there that could have been used in something more magic oriented.

This can be a starting point.

 

D&D styled feats required for armor brand of mechanics you mean? I can see that, especially if well implemented - there being a real choice there. Truly better one front, or another, but not both. I like it when games make me think about what I want to take, and why.