Wizards wearing armor

[WildcatMik]

In a completely different line of thought, I have noticed that the main issue most people are having with mages wearing plate isn't that mages shouldn't wear it: it's that fighters and those classes become particularly useless in battle because one of their defining traits has been taken away from them. Thus, in reality the problem isn't wizards per se: it's the fighters lack of versatility. Therefore, it seems to me that fighters here are the problem. Fighters should not be described as "swords + plate mail + full tank of HP" but rather a group of people who are masters in the art of combat. If this means that fighters have certain in-combat abilities (cleave, bash, coup degrace, stun, etc) that NO other class has access to - and to allow these abilities to begin from level 1, then fighters continue to have a deeper role to play in combat.

 

Thoughts?

 

Like this point. Very much.

[PsychoBlonde]

Perhaps there could also be certain spells crafted against wizards who wear certain types of armor. In would seem to me that since this world has mages who wear heavy armor, other mages (who do not wear this armor) have developed and researched spells that combat this: perhaps spells that bend metal or make it brittle (more likely to break that plate armor). Something to that effect would also be an interesting twist.

 

Or that heats metal to 10,000 degrees. These spells wouldn't be against wizards who wear armor, though, they'd apply against EVERYBODY who wears heavier armor. Which is as it should be. You don't need to give casters a special penalty for wearing armor in order to encourage them toward robes. For instance, my Arcane Warrior in Dragon Age wore the Reaper's Vestments (robes) even though she could wear armor because with them she could get a 62 armor rating whereas wearing actual armor left her 12 points shy of that. No joke.

 

What you do is make it so that the benefits of heavy armor apply more to melee classes than to casters, and the detriments don't hurt most melee types too much but DO hurt casters.

 

How to do this? Lots of ways. Here's one: armor reduces your ability to avoid being tripped or knocked down and it takes you substantially longer to get back up again after you've been tripped. Presumably the fightery classes will have the mighty strength or dexterity to avoid getting tripped, but a caster wearing heavy armor and getting up in melee will spend most of their time flat on their ass, defenseless and unable to contribute to the fight.

 

Here's another: heavier armor reduces your ability to dodge attacks, and most of the attacks that will be directed at range are the type you can dodge better than are absorbed by armor. Anything short of full plate armor won't protect you much against arrows or crossbow bolts.

 

Here's a third: certain damage types do MORE damage if you're wearing heavier armor. Lightning bolt, anyone? Or they could make it that someone wearing heavier armor takes a lot more damage but absorbs the bolt so it doesn't continue on its path. This would be a great thing for fightery types with lots of health/stamina, but your caster may want to avoid this situation like the plague.

 

Here's a fourth: all the really awesome suits that increase your spell abilities are robes. Sure, you can wear armor, but all you're getting out of it is a slightly higher AC, while the other dude who's NOT wearing armor is doing half again as much damage AND regaining mana every time he gets hit.

[Somna]

The whole wizards in armor issue just feels like a non-issue to me. Since they've told us that bullets are going to be strong vs. magical protections, that gives me the strong impression that there's going to be a kind of rock-paper-scissors relationship on types of protections and types of attacks. I just can't tell mechanically why bullets are going to be strong versions magical protections -- for example, is it going to be stronger because it's a firearm type of attack, or is it going to be considered a blunt weapon attacking and magical protections are weaker to blunt weapons in general, or is it going to be something wierd like magical protections hit by a strong enough ranged attack (that arrows don't normally qualify for) shatter and cause backlash to the caster or...what exactly?

 

And if they're applying this kind of drawback to magical protections, I'd expect the other armors to have similar sorts of drawbacks as well.

[rjshae]

Easy solution, make armor use skill dependant, and make it an expensive skill. Make the spell casting schools expensive skills as well. But that would probably make the game much more skill oriented than is intended now.

I dislike armor use skill because it's a bit like a shoe use skill. Some other solution would be preferable.

[Hertzila]

The whole wizards in armor issue just feels like a non-issue to me. Since they've told us that bullets are going to be strong vs. magical protections, that gives me the strong impression that there's going to be a kind of rock-paper-scissors relationship on types of protections and types of attacks. I just can't tell mechanically why bullets are going to be strong versions magical protections -- for example, is it going to be stronger because it's a firearm type of attack, or is it going to be considered a blunt weapon attacking and magical protections are weaker to blunt weapons in general, or is it going to be something wierd like magical protections hit by a strong enough ranged attack (that arrows don't normally qualify for) shatter and cause backlash to the caster or...what exactly?

 

And if they're applying this kind of drawback to magical protections, I'd expect the other armors to have similar sorts of drawbacks as well.

 

Josh mentioned that it's the very high speed that makes bullets skip/demolish the arcane veil. I guess one could make a generalization that anything going close to Mach 1 is effective against magical protection, which is why some wizards (battlemages, I'd presume) have decided to screw robes and wear actual armor. Without armor, a rogue armed with a wheellock pistol would kill the wizard easily.

[Borna]

Why wizards shouldn't wear armor?

Well that's easy; plate armor is very, very heavy. And no, wearing a suit of full plate armor is not the same as wearing shoes.

So, why not make wearing armor a strength based thing? I mean, it will not present any kind of a problem to someone who is trained in the art of war and is used to wearing plate or some other kind of heavy armor. I think it makes no sense to make a mage forbidden from wearing armor, but a guy who spends his life not lifting anything heavier than a book, and puts a 50 lbs suit of armor on, will pretty much be unable to perform even the basic physical actions, let alone go on a full scale adventure.

So I'm either for making it skill dependent or attribute dependent. Also, as was mentioned above, it should be an expensive skill, since heavy armor should be reserved only for elite soldiers, and imo should actually be relatively rare.

If its skill dependent, the mechanics are quite clear I think.

If its attribute dependent (say strength), and just for the sake of argument lets use ID or BG character creation; make plate armor usable only to characters with strength 18 or even 19, so that even fighters will have to earn that kind of elite protection. That way there is nothing actually preventing a wizard to wear armor, but only if he is willing to put a lot valuable attribute points towards strength (or whatever).

[Hormalakh]

 

Here's a fourth: all the really awesome suits that increase your spell abilities are robes. Sure, you can wear armor, but all you're getting out of it is a slightly higher AC, while the other dude who's NOT wearing armor is doing half again as much damage AND regaining mana every time he gets hit.

 

Cloth absorbs spells better. I like it.

[Hertzila]

Here's a fourth: all the really awesome suits that increase your spell abilities are robes. Sure, you can wear armor, but all you're getting out of it is a slightly higher AC, while the other dude who's NOT wearing armor is doing half again as much damage AND regaining mana every time he gets hit.

 

As long as the robe-wearing guy is willing to risk a rogue sneaking up to him and shooting him at point blank in the back of his head, most likely killing him instantly. "Should've at least had leather, pal!"

Or a rifled gun wielding ranger getting a lucky shot.

[WildcatMik]

Easy solution, make armor use skill dependant, and make it an expensive skill. Make the spell casting schools expensive skills as well. But that would probably make the game much more skill oriented than is intended now.

I dislike armor use skill because it's a bit like a shoe use skill. Some other solution would be preferable.

 

I kind of agree, and kind of don't. I think armour skill across a 'class' of armour is bad. I take off my plate I've been wearing for 2 years an put on yours and I'm just as comfortable in it? I think not. But gaining 'skill' in your own individual armour - i can see that working. Could be a tier thing too. Robes are quick to wear in, leather slower than cloth but faster than metal. Benefits for wearing your metal in properly outweigh benefits for leather etc but takes longer.

[Sacred_Path]

Easy solution, make armor use skill dependant, and make it an expensive skill. Make the spell casting schools expensive skills as well. But that would probably make the game much more skill oriented than is intended now.

I dislike armor use skill because it's a bit like a shoe use skill. Some other solution would be preferable.

 

If you think weapon skills are viable, armor skill shouldn't be a problem.

 

Second option, put a strength requirement on armor and make attribute points hard to come by, like in Fallout. Should be a fair trade-off.

[LadyCrimson]

I'm not really picturing a mage in a full head to toe plated armor suit, but something more like a form of breastplate and head gear. More like the stereotypical Romans or Greeks or something maybe. eg, some protection against sudden-death by projectile but still allowing for fairly decent movement.

 

The question to me seems more about whether or not spells require a long time to cast, or are they going to be more like The Force where they just have to directionally waggle their finger to instantly toss objects across a room. If you know what I mean. If it takes a fair time to cast almost any significant/combat spell, armored or not, they're going to be in the back, like any ranged fighter, with any armor just to keep them from being killed instantly before they can finish the spell. They can't be tanks and take the place of the "fighters" in that regard because (I'd guess) the time for spellcasting would still make them sitting ducks to strong melee attacks. Sure that extra AC might help them survive a couple more direct hits, but that's about it.

 

If, however, spellcasting is almost instant, then that could be another story and you'd have to alter combat/armor etc. mechanics to account for such.

[rjshae]

^^^^

I could see mage types being allowed to prepare some insta-cast spells in advance of combat (much as fighters can prep guns), but yes, allowing all spells to be cast that way would likely be unbalancing. The developers would then need to tone the spell powers down quite a bit to maintain the challenge.

Edited November 1, 2012 by rjshae

[Hertzila]

If the magic is drawn from stamina, have the stamina regenerate less when wearing heavier armor. Not prohibitively but enough that high level tactical nuke spells can practically only be cast once per fight. Robe or light armor wearing spellcasters would regenerate it quicker, allowing more frequent use, but are consequently vulnureable to more damage, especially from firearms.

Similarly, I could see staves helping with magic while swords would work better for parrying and would allow charging it with a spell to cast it simultaneously.

 

Also, allowing wizards hold a spell charged sounds like a great idea. Maybe tie it to being stored in either a weapon or a tome.

[elminster]

The poll is biased, incomplete, grammatically incorrect and most importantly, I think it's irrelevant. Obsidian has already stated (and you quoted it) that they are dealing with this issue, so:

 

Imagine you are a wizard and you can select any armor you whant. Which armor would you select?

I'd select the armor best fitting the type of wizard I would be playing.

 

So your not just picking in armor because of the look but also because of its advantages. Which advantage would you like most if given from an armor?

No, I'm, in fact, picking armor 50% because of its looks. The other 50% is how it fits with the rest of my equipment with its bonuses and stuff.

 

In the last point you just named several simple examples of types of wizards that might be implemented by Obsidian.

 

Damn, I feel mean this morning.

 

OK, I admit that it is grammatically incorrect and of course it is incomplete - which based most on the fact I wrote it at something like 3 am. I was tired, but wanted to post it just to start a discussion about armor-wearing wizards. Which went exactly the way I wanted.

 

Honestly, the reason they (Obsidian) are dealing with this topic doesnt mean we cant talk about this I tried to give an overview about the whole wizard armor discussion as good as I could - which doesnt mean you can do it better by posting your own poll.

[teknoman2]

well the poll options are definatelly limited.

to balance the game there will obviously be tradeoffs. wearing a leather armor will be different from wearing a full plate, but there will be reason enough to choose either for your character.

besides the obvious weight of the armor that limits the overall weight of the items you can carry, heavier armors should also make the character move slower. light armor should allow to fully use your dodge skill with less damage resistance, while heavy armor should give almost imunity to some damage or weapons, while taking away your ability to evade attacks. if stamina is used for the use of skills, heavier armors should increase the stamina loss. since all spells come from inner power, armor should not restrict their use, but a mage with plate mail, can't avoid attacks and has a greater risk of getting hit and having his spell interrupted. sneaking with metal armor should also be impossible or very hard at least since metal armors are noisy and shiny.

that's just a few things that may work, but i think a full time brainstorming veteran game designer can come up with something better than what any of us can come up with after a few minutes of thinking. unless we get a nuclear bomb sized moment of inspiration

[Grand Heresiarch]

First off a question: people seem to be (mis)using variants of "degenerate" to (I think) describe a gaming style that is for some reason unbalanced or undesireable. I just want to make sure I am understanding the usage corrctly. I somewhat fail to see how gamaing design is degenerate but that is a sepaarate issue.

On to matters of substance. People seem to keep pointing to D&D and stating that mages were balanced by their inability to don heavy armor. First, I would state that this supposed balance is largely illusory, especially in terms of AD&D. Mages were relatively weak early and became absurdly overpowered at higher levels. 3rd Ed mitigated this somewhat via the feat system and encouraging multiclassing, but still spellcasters had an edge. At higher levels.

One user mentioned that making mages deal the same damage as warriors was somehow a negative concept, yet this class balanceing concept is what drives mmo production today. If anything warriors ought to deal more damage to compensate for the fact that they have to close a physical gap and/or circumvent invisibility/mage armor/stoneskin et all.

Back to this idea of mages in armor. If we break from the archetype of the cowled fireball tosser and make the mages individuals who employ magic in place if brute power, we are left with some interesting options like self buffing or a broader force multiplier role beyond simply tossing around massive damage. Perhaps something more akin to a bard. There is ample cannonical precedence for this concept, one does not see Gandalf or Saruman slinging magic missiles all the time yet they are undeniably powerful in their own right.

Certainly, the heaviest armors should (and likely will) require investment in strength to equip sans penalty. This facet alone should suffice for preventing the all powerful mage-knight of degerneracy (hope I used it correctly). If a player elects to make a balanced build between strength and intellect they should be able to make a reasonably accomplished mage knight.

 

One last point, I understand that for game balancing purposes it makes things much easier to make strength and stamina fixed attributes of a character, and so must often come at the cost of intelligence. In reality this is clearly and emphatically not the case. If anything, most research indicates that high levels of physical fitness facilitates intellect (doesn't create it but helps with mental alertness and clarity). I would like to see a game that includes this idea where strength is not fixed but shaped by player actions (I.e. increased by wearing heavy armor and cruising around meleeing things rather than treating it as immutable)

 

Ok, way too much said.

[Thangorodrim]

I liked in D&D where it was defined that the arcane magics of the spellcasters were interfered with by the metal armors ... since some of the casters also used arcane gestures they needed a range of motion that all but cloth armor prohibited ... to compensate them for this weakness they had lots of protection spells for themselves, areas, and groups ...

 

if every character can do everything then you become like Elder Scrolls Oblivion ... although it was fun to be able to complete all the quests for all the classes it also removes some of the role playing choices and uniqueness of the characters ... I kind of like my mages and rogues to be different than my fighters, not just in their apparel but also their strategies since they are unable to use the same exact skills and protections of other characters ... but maybe that is just me

[teknoman2]

no one says that a wizard cant be the fantasy version of a jedi

[Somna]

I have to wonder how many people would flip if they saw the Pathfinder Magus class (which I have nothing against).

[elminster]

no one says that a wizard cant be the fantasy version of a jedi

 

Hmm I think we should let it to Lucasfilm (now Disney) to design a jedi. I regret that I cant edit my poll anymore to correct the errors and make it a bit more representative.

 

I like the comment on Elder Scrolls Oblivion. Imho having all options only works if you get some penaltys. And this with all options is I imagine difficult to implement.

Edited November 3, 2012 by elminster

[elminster]

When every class in the game has magic, so I don't see why one class should have special restrictions what to wear so that it can cast spells.

 

And removing equipment restrictions don't make wizard as fighter, because even if you can wield sword, it don't mean that you know how to use it. And wearing heavy armour don't make you immortal even if you are wizard.

 

And those who say that wiards should not have armours, because of their protective magic, you should probably read what Josh said about that in his update. Wizards magic is not effective against bullets, which is reason why some wizards in PE's world wear plate armour.

 

And in melee wizard with plate armour will probably lose to fighter who has more skill with sword and can magically enchant his speed and strength. And rogue who can make him or her self to be invisible and insubstantial has great advantage against wizard who focus more to combat than his or her spells.

 

So removing equipment restrictions don't destroy balance between classes when classes are different from what you have seen in D&D.

 

2 thoughts about that:

 

First, even if wearing armor doesnt make you immortal it has some effect to wear a different armor. Consider every class could wear the best armor in the game - a bit lame dont you think? You need then an armor system that effects the armor choice. That means an armor system with several best armor - for robes, leather armor, scale, chain... etc.

 

Second, your thoughts about bullets. I agree with this but: as obsidian talked about powder weapons they said something they have a long reload time and are inaccurate. They talked about it as these weapons are part of the game but only to be chosen from few players (because of its characteristics). So you dont put on an armor just to be able to fight 10 percent of your enemies do you?

Edited November 3, 2012 by elminster

[elminster]

Perhaps there could also be certain spells crafted against wizards who wear certain types of armor. In would seem to me that since this world has mages who wear heavy armor, other mages (who do not wear this armor) have developed and researched spells that combat this: perhaps spells that bend metal or make it brittle (more likely to break that plate armor). Something to that effect would also be an interesting twist.

 

Or that heats metal to 10,000 degrees. These spells wouldn't be against wizards who wear armor, though, they'd apply against EVERYBODY who wears heavier armor. Which is as it should be. You don't need to give casters a special penalty for wearing armor in order to encourage them toward robes. For instance, my Arcane Warrior in Dragon Age wore the Reaper's Vestments (robes) even though she could wear armor because with them she could get a 62 armor rating whereas wearing actual armor left her 12 points shy of that. No joke.

 

What you do is make it so that the benefits of heavy armor apply more to melee classes than to casters, and the detriments don't hurt most melee types too much but DO hurt casters.

 

How to do this? Lots of ways. Here's one: armor reduces your ability to avoid being tripped or knocked down and it takes you substantially longer to get back up again after you've been tripped. Presumably the fightery classes will have the mighty strength or dexterity to avoid getting tripped, but a caster wearing heavy armor and getting up in melee will spend most of their time flat on their ass, defenseless and unable to contribute to the fight.

 

Here's another: heavier armor reduces your ability to dodge attacks, and most of the attacks that will be directed at range are the type you can dodge better than are absorbed by armor. Anything short of full plate armor won't protect you much against arrows or crossbow bolts.

 

Here's a third: certain damage types do MORE damage if you're wearing heavier armor. Lightning bolt, anyone? Or they could make it that someone wearing heavier armor takes a lot more damage but absorbs the bolt so it doesn't continue on its path. This would be a great thing for fightery types with lots of health/stamina, but your caster may want to avoid this situation like the plague.

 

Here's a fourth: all the really awesome suits that increase your spell abilities are robes. Sure, you can wear armor, but all you're getting out of it is a slightly higher AC, while the other dude who's NOT wearing armor is doing half again as much damage AND regaining mana every time he gets hit.

 

I like your first way. That is something very intuitive which imho should be implemented.

 

The second is the common way I think. I fear that wizards get a bit to powerful by that (imagine something like a spell is disrupted when hit). It might work with applied benefits you suggest which I dont like.

 

The third is common as well. The question if it is implemented: Is it the only way armors differ from?

 

The forth with the robes is not intuitive and reminds me on Diablo (1-3). Im quiet sure its not working in a not very-combat-oriented rpg. The reasons are the mana you mentioned and the increased damage for all spells. Creating many spells will be difficult then. And I loved the huge number of spells in Baldurs Gate 1&2 and wouldnt like to miss this for pe.

[elminster]

Easy solution, make armor use skill dependant, and make it an expensive skill. Make the spell casting schools expensive skills as well. But that would probably make the game much more skill oriented than is intended now.

I dislike armor use skill because it's a bit like a shoe use skill. Some other solution would be preferable.

 

I agree with this. Only "real" skills. No checking for 1353 different skills every 5 minutes in the game please.

[Osvir]

Kingdoms of Amulur has a great class system, wherein you can be a full fledged Fighter, or a full fledged Wizard, or you can combine the two together and be a Fighter/Wizard. You could combine Wizard/Rogue and Rogue/Fighter, or all three together into one class. Great system, but it allowed "Class Change" at will at any point (which works for a "Single Hero Adventure", with no companions. Class Change at will wouldn't work for P:E).

Edited November 4, 2012 by Osvir

[jivex5k]

I hope I can be a tank mage!

It was awesome in UO, running around with a halberd, whacking a dude, de-equiping it to land an energy bolt + explosion combo, re-equip for finishing whack.....

Good times man, good times.