From: ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Why are there level limits?
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Date: 28 Aug 92 20:22:47 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <BtpLHs.6Kw@news.cso.uiuc.edu> StarWatcher@uiuc.edu writes:

OK, I'll take these one at a time.  I've run across most of them with
my DM, but we felt that these aren't prohibiting armor, for the reasons
below.

>PHBv2, p. 30: " Wizards cannot wear any armor, for several reasons.  Firstly,
>most spells require complicated gestures and odd posturings by the caster
>and armor restricts the wearer's ability to do these properly.  Secondly,
>the wizard spent most of his youth...learning arcane languages, poring
>through old books, and practicing his spells.  This leaves no time for 
>learning other things.... If the wizard had spent his time learning about
>armor, he would not have even the meager skills and powers he begins with."

While this may be fine for a pure wizard, multi-class wizards couldn't
fall under this restriction.  If that were the case, you would also have to
rule that they cannot use swords or other weapons, because the reasons
wizards use daggers in the first place is because it's easy to learn and
doesn't require lots of time.

So if a multi-class wizard can learn to use a sword, why can't he learn to
wear armor?

While it's true that armor does prevent spellcasting, there's no reason a
wizard can't use armor and NOT CAST SPELLS.

>PHBv2, p. 45: "A multi-classed wizard can freely combine the powers of the
>wizard with any other class allowed, although the wearing of armor is
>restricted.

This was our biggest stumbling block.  Did TSR mean restricted, or prohibited?
If it's the former, restricted to what?

Not being able to cast spells while in armor (the way we view it)?
Not being able to use specific kinds of armor (like metal armor)?
What?

If they mean that the wearing of armor is *prohibited*, then why didn't they
say that?

>PHBv2, p. 45: "A dual-class fighter/mage, for example, cannot cast spells
>while wearing armor."

Given.  But that doesn't mean he can't wear the armor and not cast spells.

>Complete Wizard's Handbook, p. 34: "In no case is a wizard allowed to
>purchase armor."

This is the only one I've never seen.  I went back and looked it up, and
it's under the section of wizard "kits".  I don't know what a kit is, so
I never read this before.  Anyone want to enlighten me?  Are kits just for
single-class wizards, or can they be used for multi- or dual-classed
wizards as well?  If they can't, then this wouldn't apply to multi-classed
characters, so there's still no definite ruling.

If they can, I still have a problem with their wording, just like "restricted."
Why do they say a wizard can't PURCHASE armor?  Why not just say that in
no case is a wizrd allowed to WEAR armor?


This is one subject where I think TSR really dropped the ball (hell, I'm
starting to think they might have done it on purpose, because no where
do they expressly FORBID wizards to wear armor).

-- 
Jorge Diaz                       | Sign in a restaurant:
Georgia Institute of Technology  | 
Office of Information Technology |   "We reserve the right to serve refuse to
ccoprdj@prism.gatech.edu         |        anyone."