The Mage Robe/Armor Dilemma

[Brother Michael]

The question is why not just use the sword.

It was "why not just a sword", as in, "why not use a sword instead of magic?"

Yes, exactly. Why use your gay little shocking grasp when you can just focus entirely on the sword and get comparable results?

[Vergil]

I said melee range, not touch.

So you're gonna aim your little 3 inch range **** blast whilst trying to swing a sword effectively?

Have you ever seen a paladin in a video game? Maybe played Witcher 3?

I've seen paladins that have used ranged magic sure but I'm not sure what sort of "short range" magic you're planning on using. Did you mean to say buffs and misspoke?

[rusty_shackleford]

The question is why not just use the sword.

It was "why not just a sword", as in, "why not use a sword instead of magic?"

Yes, exactly. Why use your gay little shocking grasp when you can just focus entirely on the sword and get comparable results?

One weapon good, two weapon better.

[Brother Michael]

It was "why not just a sword", as in, "why not use a sword instead of magic?"

Yes, exactly. Why use your gay little shocking grasp when you can just focus entirely on the sword and get comparable results?

One weapon good, two weapon better.

In the already rare cases of historical dual wielding, they are almost never symmetrical weapons, and for good reason. The point of bringing an offhand would be to accomplish something your other weapon cannot do as effectively.

[rusty_shackleford]

Yes, exactly. Why use your gay little shocking grasp when you can just focus entirely on the sword and get comparable results?

One weapon good, two weapon better.

In the already rare cases of historical dual wielding, they are almost never symmetrical weapons, and for good reason. The point of bringing an offhand would be to accomplish something your other weapon cannot do as effectively.

This might surprise you, but being able to shoot fire out your hand is not the same as another sword.

[Brother Michael]

One weapon good, two weapon better.

In the already rare cases of historical dual wielding, they are almost never symmetrical weapons, and for good reason. The point of bringing an offhand would be to accomplish something your other weapon cannot do as effectively.

This might surprise you, but being able to shoot fire out your hand is not the same as another sword.

With the abstraction necessary in a game, fire only in melee range is hardly different from another sword. Different damage type is all.

[rusty_shackleford]

In the already rare cases of historical dual wielding, they are almost never symmetrical weapons, and for good reason. The point of bringing an offhand would be to accomplish something your other weapon cannot do as effectively.

This might surprise you, but being able to shoot fire out your hand is not the same as another sword.

With the abstraction necessary in a game, fire only in melee range is hardly different from another sword. Different damage type is all.

Get rid of the abstraction

[Brother Michael]

This might surprise you, but being able to shoot fire out your hand is not the same as another sword.

With the abstraction necessary in a game, fire only in melee range is hardly different from another sword. Different damage type is all.

Get rid of the abstraction

Okay so where are we? Fantasy in real? Video game? Tabletop? Which one?

[rusty_shackleford]

With the abstraction necessary in a game, fire only in melee range is hardly different from another sword. Different damage type is all.

Get rid of the abstraction

Okay so where are we? Fantasy in real? Video game? Tabletop? Which one?

In real life just use a gun instead of a fireball, same thing.

[Brother Michael]

Get rid of the abstraction

Okay so where are we? Fantasy in real? Video game? Tabletop? Which one?

In real life just use a gun instead of a fireball, same thing.

Oh so we’re not restricting to close range now?

[rusty_shackleford]

Okay so where are we? Fantasy in real? Video game? Tabletop? Which one?

In real life just use a gun instead of a fireball, same thing.

Oh so we’re not restricting to close range now?

pistol except if the bullet goes past 15 feet it just disappears

[Brother Michael]

In real life just use a gun instead of a fireball, same thing.

Oh so we’re not restricting to close range now?

pistol except if the bullet goes past 15 feet it just disappears

So mage knight can exist, but it still creates an awkward point of world building.

[Magick]

Just make their magic only usable at close range, problem solved.
Ranged magic requires you to use a totally-not-a-dress, melee magic doesn't, ez.

At that point why not just use a sword?

You do use the sword, you use both.

So putting on the armour makes you become a battlemage, then. Interesting.
That's one way of doing it. The other is just robes making the spells more powerful or granting a wider array, yeah. (same thing, I guess).

Close range blasts, shields, weapon enchantments, weapon based magic slashes / casting like in Magicka weapon imbue.

[rusty_shackleford]

So mage knight can exist, but it still creates an awkward point of world building.

Just have them taught a different form of magic meant to be used in melee range.

[J1M]

Mage fighters should combine disciplines so they are more than two low level characters. Like enchanting an arrow to make it explode or a blade to pass through armor.

[Magick]

Mage fighters should combine disciplines so they are more than two low level characters. Like enchanting an arrow to make it explode or a blade to pass through armor.

Shielding themselves, protection against certain elements and especially magic etc. absolutely.
Then utilising blink and such spells, too. There's a lot that a magic-enhanced warrior could do. Including being an anti-mage.

[Brother Michael]

So mage knight can exist, but it still creates an awkward point of world building.

Just have them taught a different form of magic meant to be used in melee range.

But can a normal mage wear armor and cast from a distance?

[LemonDemonGirl]

In that case, Clerics shouldn't be allowed to multiclass into Wizard/Sorcerer/Warlock, and vice versa

[Lich]

Looking like a trash can is undignified. That's what prevents mages from wearing armor.

[Big Red Dog]

fire only in melee range is hardly different from another sword.

have you never been lit on fire? it's much different than being stabbed

[UltraFan123]

Melee mage with limited spellcasting that wears heavy armor and uses sword with close-range spells did exist as well in 3.5 dnd and Pathfinder 1e, which were the [Duskblade] and the [Magus] respectively.

I'm reminded as well of Tyranny from Obsidian in which you could wear the heaviest armors as a mage if you wanted, but you casted spells at a slower rate and it was easier to have your spells disrupted. I never cared because I looked cool in armor so I sucked up the disadvantages. lmfao

[J1M]

fire only in melee range is hardly different from another sword.

have you never been lit on fire? it's much different than being stabbed

Can't say I am particularly flammable. Are you growing out your hair for a particular reason?

[rusty_shackleford]

So mage knight can exist, but it still creates an awkward point of world building.

Just have them taught a different form of magic meant to be used in melee range.

But can a normal mage wear armor and cast from a distance?

no because mages are gay

[KnightoftheWind]

Mages are healpigs and that is all they will ever be good for.

[Big Red Dog]

fire only in melee range is hardly different from another sword.

have you never been lit on fire? it's much different than being stabbed

Can't say I am particularly flammable. Are you growing out your hair for a particular reason?

i am very hairy, i wish i had alopecia
gasoline makes anyone flamable