PDA

View Full Version : VC: Necromancers and Armor



notlogic
24-09-2007, 00:26
Can Necromancers wear magic armor in a VC list? I own a Lizardman and Tomb Kings army, so I'm accustomed to not being able to put armor on my casters. However, I played against a VC list that had a Necromancer on a barded steed with the enchanted shield (3+ armor on a caster, ick). We found a couple of references to casters/necromancers perhaps being limited on their armor selection, but nothing definite. Can anyone direct me to a specific page stating one way or another?

Masque
24-09-2007, 01:01
Necromancers cannot wear armour. Check out the Magic Armour section on page 121 of the BRB.

empireguard
24-09-2007, 01:47
There is no specific rule against Wizards/spell casters having armour. However if the necromancer (or any other character) doesnít have access to a normal Item type he canít have a magical one. In this case if he canít have shield he canít have the enchanted shield.

Festus
24-09-2007, 07:52
Well, there still is the silly Item of the Bone Armour, though...

Festus

Gorbad Ironclaw
24-09-2007, 10:26
But would anyone actually take that? And strickly speaking, Necromancers still can't get it, so it's quite a useless item.

Chicago Slim
24-09-2007, 12:33
Off the topic of Necromancers, in particular, you should be aware that some spellcasters can use considerable armor.

Chaos in particular, tends to have sorcerers in chaos armor, riding barded steeds (2+ save), or a Bray Shaman on foot, in chaos armor and carrying a Bray Staff (2+ save in hand-to-hand, and he's ON FOOT!!)

High Elves (at least in their current book) have a magic armor that also makes the wearer a Lvl 1 wizard, who can cast while carrying any armor-- with the enchanted shield and a barded steed, he could easily get a 1+ save...

So, the typical case (no armor for spell casters) has plenty of exceptions. Read the book, when you are presented with a spellcaster in armor, to see if it's legit.

Nargrakhan
24-09-2007, 17:57
Off Topic: Where does the notion that wizards can't wear armor and cast spells come from? Is it mentioned somewhere in the Lord of the Rings saga or something (as I'm always told that's where most Fantasy settings are derived from)? It just drives me crazy. D&D does it... Warhammer does it...

It's only been recently that I've seen the trend go away from that - probably due in part to anime villain spellcasters wearing more armor than their own body weight, yet able to cast apocalypse spells. One of the reasons why I like Iron Kingdoms, was having wizards in "powered armor" and what have you.

Sorry for the rant... :(

Krankenstein
24-09-2007, 18:04
Off Topic: Where does the notion that wizards can't wear armor and cast spells come from? Is it mentioned somewhere in the Lord of the Rings saga or something (as I'm always told that's where most Fantasy settings are derived from)? It just drives me crazy. D&D does it... Warhammer does it...

Off Topic:: I believe it comes from D&D actually. It's a game balance thing: you have wizards here and warriors there, both have to have options denied to the other. It's called niche protection.

theunwantedbeing
24-09-2007, 18:05
The rulebook mentions that wearing armour might otherwise impede the spellcasters abilities in the magical armour section.

You need to be able to wear mundane armour to take magic armour.
You need to be able to carry a mundane sheild to carry a magical one.

Necromancers cannot ever take magic sheilds,as they dont have access to mundane ones.
Im not putting a page reference as usually when I do my post gets ignored....

Griefbringer
24-09-2007, 18:34
Well, there still is the silly Item of the Bone Armour, though...


RAW + 7th edition rules tends to be a bit problematic combination when it comes to necromancers and taking that item.

Probably will be fixed by the new VC book next year, I guess in the mean time we can stick to some liberal house rules allowing necromancers to take that item.

Masque
24-09-2007, 19:32
High Elves (at least in their current book) have a magic armor that also makes the wearer a Lvl 1 wizard, who can cast while carrying any armor-- with the enchanted shield and a barded steed, he could easily get a 1+ save...

There is no such magical armour in the High Elf army book and if there was it could not be combined with an Enchanted Shield as a character can only have one piece of Magic Armour. There is a Talisman (Radiant Gem of Hoeth) with that effect though.

T10
24-09-2007, 21:22
The Armour of Bone states:

"A Wizard can wear this armour without losing his ability to cast spells."

This both permits the Necromancer (a Vampire Counts army Wizard) to use the armour and permits him to retain his spellcasting ability while doing so.

-T10

Red_Duke
28-09-2007, 09:18
Indeed - you can actually get a 3+ save with a necromancer, by combining the Armour of Bone and a barded steed. Armour of Bone is the ONLY type of armour that necromancers can wear.

Arnizipal
28-09-2007, 14:31
But would anyone actually take that? And strickly speaking, Necromancers still can't get it, so it's quite a useless item.
It's still a fun item. Characters wearing it can shrug of a canonball (for one time only).

Gorbad Ironclaw
28-09-2007, 16:14
Yeah, but my Master Necromancer can use his cloak of mist and shadows and laugh at an entire Imperial artillery battery :p

And T10, strickly speaking I don't believe that sentence allows the necromancer to take it, it just means if he could he would be able to cast spells. Although I'd be overjoyed if I had an opponent that wanted to take it on his necromancer. Means less room for something useful!

Red_Duke
28-09-2007, 16:22
useful in games <2k though, as then you really want your mandatory necromancer general (well, mandatory as long as you dont waste your points on a Lvl1 necrarch thrall anyway) running around with no armour save! ive seen games go down very quickly when he gets spanked by things like terradons, and the entire army then falls to bits...

Urgat
28-09-2007, 16:33
It's still a fun item. Characters wearing it can shrug of a canonball (for one time only).


I tested an empire army a couple days ago, I had a canon, and there was that chaos sorcerer runing around on his own (too used to my O&G army not having ranged weapons I suppose), well it took 3 shots to take him down ( my estimations were always spot on -like 1" in front of the target-, but I rolled 1 to wound twice. Infuriating :p) Imho talismans that give a ward save are better for sorcerers, but the best is a good fat unit to hide in, then leave when it's about to get in combat.
Well unless you're playing Chaos or Ogres, then your sorcerer can happily join the fight (annoying and stupid that butchers cannot get any weapon options :eyebrows: ).

EvC
28-09-2007, 22:28
And T10, strickly speaking I don't believe that sentence allows the necromancer to take it, it just means if he could he would be able to cast spells. Although I'd be overjoyed if I had an opponent that wanted to take it on his necromancer. Means less room for something useful!

Strictly speaking the entire sentence is entirely redundant and meaningless if we don't take it to mean Necromancers can wear it...