From: paul@legoland.Eng.Sun.COM (Paul Pantera)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Why are their level limits?
Date: 28 Aug 1992 21:50:51 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems
Distribution: world
Reply-To: paul@legoland.Eng.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: legoland

>|> >>That and the fact that the armour also restricts movement
>|> >>and thereby interferes with casting spells.

Yes.  Mages cannot cast spells in armor because casting mage spells requires
all kinds of cool arm and leg movements that cannot be accomplished with the
encumbrance of armor (except the exception of elves with elven chain).  There-
fore, a multi-classed mage/fighter cannot wear armor and cast spells simul-
taneously.  Just because you know how to use a sword does not let you move
freely within armor.

>|> Actually, I'm considering not permitting wizards to multi-class in future 
>|> campaigns I run, partially because of the armor issue...if you want to be a 
>|> wizard, you're going to be a *real* wizard and run around in your bathrobe!

Don't go off the deep end.  The combination is a perfectly allowable one, but
the character suffers the disadvantage of not wearing armor.  He/she still gets
the weapon allowances, attack and saving throw bonuses, increased con bonuses,
etc.  Letting the character cast spells in armor is letting the character get
away with too much.

>|> >So, how do you explain that a cleric can cast spells in armor?
>|> 
>|> Because cleric spells are different than wizard spells.  
>
>Now that's not much more of an explaination than "'cause" would be.

The magic that comes from Clerical spells comes from the Cleric's God, and
therefore the magic is totally different from the magic of a mage.  This type
of magic does not require as complicated of movements, and can therefore be
accomplished while wearing armor.

>|> Another way of looking at this whole thread is that you are trying to apply
>|> real-world perspectives to a fantasy role-playing game, and *every time* 
>|> you are going to come to the conclusion that rules don't make sense.  Indeed, 
>|> they *don't* make sense; that's why it's called _fantasy_.

The AD&D2 rules can be made to make sense and provide game balance at the same
time.  You just have to work at it.

>|> >After a cleric uses a mace for 10 years, I figure he'd become specialized
>|> >in it, too:  It would just happen.
>|> 
>|> No, because specialization comes from an intensive study of the art of using
>|> a weapon.  If a cleric gets into intensive study of weapons, he's *not* 
>|> devoting sufficient time to his priestly duties, and is therefore a bad cleric.
>
>Sounds like a subjective opinion to me.  What if the cleric worshipped the god of
>war and combat?
>

A cleric spends too much of his time praying for spells and studying his religion
to practice enough with a weapon to become specialized.  The subject hasn't come
up lately, but I think not even Paladins and Rangers can't specialize because of
this same reason.

>|> Matthew DeLuca                      "I'd hire the Dorsai, if I knew their 
>|> Georgia Institute of Technology      P.O. box."
>|> Office of Information Technology                - Zebediah Carter, 
>|> Internet: ccoprmd@prism.gatech.edu              _The Number of the Beast_

>Greg Smith
>
>DISCLAIMER:  My ideas are entirely my own unless MDC decides to patent them.
>I am not empowered to speak for Mead Data Central or Mead Corporation.

 _     _
|_)   |_)
| aul | antera                  paul@legoland.eng.sun.com