PDA

View Full Version : Do Vampires wear Armour in WHFB



Asp
29-08-2012, 13:53
It is my understanding that you cannot wear armour and cast spells.

So not knowing a whole lot about WHFB does this mean that vampires commonly run around unarmoued?

Odin
29-08-2012, 13:54
Vampires are one of the few spellcasters in WHFB who can wear armour and cast spells, Chaos Sorcerers being another notable case.

Darkminion
29-08-2012, 14:02
And Ogre casters as well.

D...

Mr_Rose
29-08-2012, 14:33
The short answer is no.
The long answer is that the rule isn't that you can't cast with armour, it's that you can't get magic armour unless you could ordinarily get mundane and they just make sure that most wizards can't get mundane armour. One of the joys of centralised design.

Lord Zarkov
29-08-2012, 14:46
The short answer is no.
The long answer is that the rule isn't that you can't cast with armour, it's that you can't get magic armour unless you could ordinarily get mundane and they just make sure that most wizards can't get mundane armour. One of the joys of centralised design.

Well not quite in 8th. The long answer is that wizards can't buy magic armour unless they can buy mundane armour. The reason given for this being that armour interferes with most wizards' spellcasting ability, the exception being those that can get mundane armour who are fine.

Lance Tankmen
29-08-2012, 15:08
i know being safer in combat throws off my spell casting...right?

NitrosOkay
30-08-2012, 04:14
Hey it's hard to make all those precise hand movements in bulky plate.

KharnTheBetrayer01
30-08-2012, 04:42
Iron is often a popular magic-resistant material in folklore, which could explain some of it. Intricate movements being difficult in steel-plate/mithril gloves could be another.

Lore-wise I think most mages are pretty good at erecting shields of their chosen element to deflect the odds and ends, and some possibly prefer the ease of movement and lightness of a robe. Its possible the more frail mages just aren't strong enough to reliably wear thick armour for extended periods of time. Still others will be arrogant, Discworld-esque wizards who detest the idea of people seeing them as anything other than the real deal, and so travel adorned in all the necessary frippery that being a magic user entails.

In-game, it's mostly a hangover from the old days, and a minor balancing rule. Most mages are dangerous enough without making them hellishly durable as well.

DragonArmy
31-08-2012, 05:36
i know being safer in combat throws off my spell casting...right?

It's also an issue of trust, thats why we always put wizards in the front corner, don't trust 'um. Why else force the unarmored guy in the front during close combat? my wizards don't wear army because they are too weak. too much reading, not enough bench pressing.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Dark Aly
31-08-2012, 15:36
They probably can't afford it. There seems to be so many wizards in the warhammer world that profit margins are low, whereas decent fighty characters are so rare they can charge top notch for their services and so can get the good gear.

logan054
31-08-2012, 19:26
The short answer is no.
The long answer is that the rule isn't that you can't cast with armour, it's that you can't get magic armour unless you could ordinarily get mundane and they just make sure that most wizards can't get mundane armour. One of the joys of centralised design.

That isn't the long answer, the long answer is in previous editions, you could not wear armour and cast spells, the only models that could use to be models wearing chaos armour as it was considered to be part of the models body and as such did not interfere with the models ability to cast spells, it has noting to do with centralised, its simply wizards don't have options on armour because before it was pointless and its something that has lingered about for many editions.

Dark Aly
01-09-2012, 00:41
when bloodlines where in greater effect didn't those who wore the best armour (blood dragons) have significantly worse casting abilities whilst the best wizards (necrarch) had no armour at all?

Kayosiv
01-09-2012, 08:48
Correct. Only blood dragons were allowed full plate, while Von Carsteins were able to get magical armor. Strigoi, Necrarch, and Lahmian vampires were still unable to wear any armor unless it specifically said they were allowed to such as the armour of bone. The most protection you could get your vampire in the olden days beyond a ward save was a barded horse.

Blood Dragons also produced one less power dice than would be normal for a spellcaster of their level. Back in the day you produced 1 per level, so a level 2 Blood Dragon wizard would only make 1 power dice.

Lord Zarkov
01-09-2012, 08:50
when bloodlines where in greater effect didn't those who wore the best armour (blood dragons) have significantly worse casting abilities whilst the best wizards (necrarch) had no armour at all?

Yep, Only Von Carstien Thralls and Blood Dragons of any sort could have armour. Thralls couldn't cast (unless you were Necrach and spent almost your entire MI allowance on it), and Blood Dragons lost a power dice IIRC. Their Counts and Lords did come Plate Mail though.

logan054
01-09-2012, 10:37
Yep, Only Von Carstien Thralls and Blood Dragons of any sort could have armour. Thralls couldn't cast (unless you were Necrach and spent almost your entire MI allowance on it), and Blood Dragons lost a power dice IIRC. Their Counts and Lords did come Plate Mail though.

this is still a throw back from older editions, I believe it went back to 4th ed, my memories are a little hazy, I was just a pup when I played 4th ed.