Oblivious Presents: Mages, Wizards and General Magic Users.

[Cpt_Oblivious]

I've noticed something lately with regards to the users of the arcane arts within games, which has started to puzzle me.

• Mages wear dresses.

No, not kilts. Dresses.
Why is this? What is this arbitrary law that forbids the Wizards of fantastical realms from wearing appropriate protection, like all other adventuring heroes? Now I know this is not true in all games, but the vast majority of games with a fantasy settingconform to the unwritten law that Wizards wear dresses. Sure, they may call them robes - I've even seen them jokingly labelled Muumuus [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muumuu] in the free MMO Dungeon Runners - but it's still a man in a dress. Now, here I must stress that I have nothing wrong with cross-dressing and I myself have been caught doing it for charity, so this isn't a rant saying "OMG It's wrong and ghey" before you all yell at me. I simply want to know why wizards must wear robes.


[img=inline_caption align='left' src='http://liberal-debutante.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/wow_mage_guide.jpg']While there are games that allow your magic using character(s) to protect themselves adequately with chainmail and platemail and the like, Dragon Age is one example I've noticed with my mage stomping around in his lovely bloodspattered chainmail. But this trend of robed wizards continues, even in the giants of the gaming nation. World of Warcraft refuses to let their Mages, Warlocks and Priests, generally the primary healer required for any group outing, wear anything more protective than a duvet. Sure some of these items may look pretty and have some "bitchin stats" but still, these brave adventurers are almost defenseless against physical assault.

So I guess my real question is this: Why do the magic users get the worst gear?
Everyone seems to be clamouring over "realism" in games and a more believable fantasy yet still restricts those zany mages to wearing something no more protective than a menacing stare. If we're to really connect with our hand-crafted elven Mini-Mes as all games truly aspire to then we can't let game developers force them to be cold and vulnerable. I say we let our mages dress as [sub]Sure, she may look hot, but it's really chilly out there.[/sub] Spacethey should in times of war and strife, especially if they're to be going on the battlefield.

So what say you? Should mages, wizards, warlocks and priests live forever in the cloth? Or should they break free of the
Manacles of Opression+1 and wear whatever they damn well please and whatever will serve them best in their adventures?

In fact, as a closing thought: Does anyone even know why our magicly gifted heroes have been shafted with robes throughout the ages? Is it tradition? Is it ceremonial? Or is it just everyone copying one another?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

An Addition.[footnote]This is posted in Page 2, I thought I'd put it here, too.[/footnote]
[small]Thank you to all who have replied and answered my question. And a special thanks to Neutral Drow [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/profiles/view/NeutralDrow] who explained the difference between robes and dresses.[/small]

It does seem the problem is sourced at good old Dungeons & Dragons and that magic being interfered with by iron as well as restrictive armour stopping the wizard from performing all the hand gestures required to cast their spells. It's also been suggested that robes are indeed ceremonial, having been uniforms from the great schools of magic another option is that it's for comfort and warmth, which is understandable since I've worn full plate armour and it is indeed a *****. While it may seem that was what I was implying that mages should protect themselves with, I really meant to say anything more protective than their robes, such as leather armour, the idea of which I noticed was thrown around briefly between some of you.

What my main issue with this lack of armor is, if the magical laws of the world in which you're playing don't state that iron or metal interferes with magical energies - which would imply that magic is, in fact, some sort of radiation, which is a whole new problem altogether - then why couldn't mages, in their great academies and universities, have been prepared for the outside world and the fact that they may need protecting. I mean an hour or two of physical exercise a day wouldn't go amiss, build up their strength and stamina, to allow for greater running out of danger and to allow them to wear (at the very least) a chainmail vest. The short sleeves can't affect hand gestures, it's not too uncomfortable and not even all that heavy when the weight is distributed evenly over a torso.

So in the end it seems that tradition is right, in a sense. It is the tradition of Fantasy writers first and then becomes the same within the worlds they create. Put simply, one guy did it and the others followed. It became a convention and no one wishes to deviate from it.

 

[Radeonx]

I upgraded my mage in Dragon Age just so I could wear armor.

 

[willard3]

Try reading a Dungeons and Dragons manual. If you try to cast spells while wearing armor, there is a chance that your spell will instantly fail if it has somatic components (where you wave your arms around, dance, etc.)...more so if you're in full plate or something.

In general, spellcasting is assumed to be much more intricate and precise than just saying "fireball!" and shooting an Orb Of Death(tm). If you screw up one part of the casting, the spell fails.

Some games ignore this because it's not feasible or makes the game un-fun. But it's generally become something of a tradition to have unarmored mages, even if there's no armor penalty.

Oh, and I just realized...mages train so freaking hard at magical arts that they generally don't have time to spend on martial ones like how to use armor properly. "But willard3, you just put it on and take it off!" you might say. Not so; it's way more complicated than you might think.

 

[Kiefer13]

For balance, I would assume. DPS specced mages can generally put out WAY more damage than a similarly specced warrior (or at least, that's what seems to be the case), so it stands to reason that they should be defensively weaker. Besides, that's why you get hybrid classes like Battlemages and Paladins.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Well in some games it is for fantasy fact as apparently all of them as you have stated wear dresses. Some for example Guild Wars is for balance as it would be unfair if an Elementalist had the same armor as a Warrior. Others allow you to do it but at a penalty I think Oblivion did it well as you get a penatly from having armor but if you are good with the armor the penalty is unnoticeable.

For most things it is for balance as a proper mage has a much higher damage output for a Warrior who's main job is to tank and absorb damage while Spell Caster deal high damage, debuff, etc and while Rangers interupt action, deal damage, various support offense jobs like poison things.

 

[El Poncho]

There was a song I liked about this, also I guess it's because if mages/warlocks/priests had good armour in WoW they would make awesome tanks?

 

[IamQ]

They have to wear their bitchin' pimp robe to make every sucka' on tha' streets jealus of 'em!


It's not impossible.

 

[FactualSquirrel]

Well, um I'm guessing developers do it because that is the classical view of a wizard, wearing robes and a pointy hat, why that is however, I have no fucking clue.

And yes they should be able to wear something more than a glorified dress.

 

[Space Spoons]

I don't know much about magical lore and all that, but I'm willing to guess some of it is ceremonial. When you hear talk of Wizards and Mages and such, there's almost always mention of some ancient Cathedral where the most wise magic users gather, or some academy where budding magicians are taught. I always figured robes were just uniforms for those sacred places, like monks wearing robes in a monastery.

 

[similar.squirrel]

According to Dungeons and Dragons, armour is too heavy and restrictive for the hand-signally components of the average spell. That still leaves the question of the trousers, though. Perhaps mages expel excess heat through their kneecaps.

 

[carpathic]

Well, since mages are by definition sissies, then they should really wear dresses.

 

[SantoUno]

motherfucking snipped

Well in most games armor apparently hinders magic users from casting spells for some reason, don't know why.

[sub]And if it does, then it's just stupid[/sub]

Kinda what I was thinking.

Also keep in mind that in many games robes and dresses are enchanted or have some sort of power that amplifies or aids the magic user's magic abilities, this one is reasonable.

I guess after so many years we got used to accept magic users as robe/dress wearers.

 

[NeutralDrow]

In fact, as a closing thought: Does anyone even know why our magicly gifted heroes have been shafted with robes throughout the ages? Is it tradition? Is it ceremonial? Or is it just everyone copying one another?

They're not dresses. A dress specifically combines a skirt and bodice, even those that are one piece, and are often sleeveless or short-sleeved. A robe is always a single garment, very loose fitting (lacking definition between chest and legs), and pretty much always sleeved.

A few reasons. Robes are traditional wear, and often strongly associated with both the arcane and the divine (as well as with non-fighting nobles and clergy). They're also damned comfortable.

Also, game balance. Magic using heroes in RPGs tend to be able to call the forces of nature or spirit to lay waste to whatever they lay eyes on, balanced by the fact that if someone shoves a sword at them point-blank, they're in trouble. In traditional D&D, this didn't apply to divine magic users because their spells were typically less overtly destructive, so they didn't need to have that sort of check. The vancian magic justification in-game is that armor interferes with movement, and arcane magic typically requires intricate gesticulation.

Of course, that doesn't need to be the case. I'd love to have a mage in WoW who could wear and socket plate armor. I imagine other people would probably object to my wearing the best armor in the game while using some of the most destructive abilities single-handed, but those guys are wimps who should have rolled a mage.

 

[The Austin]

I think they wear robes.

 

[TsunamiWombat]

Try reading a Dungeons and Dragons manual. If you try to cast spells while wearing armor, there is a chance that your spell will instantly fail if it has somatic components (where you wave your arms around, dance, etc.)...more so if you're in full plate or something.

In general, spellcasting is assumed to be much more intricate and precise than just saying "fireball!" and shooting an Orb Of Death(tm). If you screw up one part of the casting, the spell fails.

Some games ignore this because it's not feasible or makes the game un-fun. But it's generally become something of a tradition to have unarmored mages, even if there's no armor penalty.

Oh, and I just realized...mages train so freaking hard at magical arts that they generally don't have time to spend on martial ones like how to use armor properly. "But willard3, you just put it on and take it off!" you might say. Not so; it's way more complicated than you might think.

This. Furthermore, in universe cultural lore can also be attributed to this. In the Krynn setting, mages are forbidden to wield a sword or wear armor by law because of a historial fear of conquoring warrior mages - even the NPC's know a spellcasting tank is IMBA!

As for why mages don't just wear shirts and trousers... Less impressive looking? The robes I suppose are like a gang tatoo. You see a guy in robes, you instantly know he's a mage.

 

[Composer]

apparently the writers thing armor CONDUCT magic poorly so its not used. plus it evens the odds alittle a fully armored guy hurling massive fireballs sounds way harder then a guy in a robe hurling fireballs.
the point of the classes is to have advantages and disadvantages its only cause it levels the odds

 

[paragon1]

Because wearing armor is fucking exhausting? Because it's unlikely that someone whose nose-deep in magical scrolls all day will be able to lug around half their mass in metal? Because it's hard to run away in armor? Because spell casters would be powerful enough already, and giving them unfettered access to armor would completely unbalance the game(s)? Because it's a convenient way to identify who can kill everyone in the room with a sword, and who can do it with a little concentration and a few special words?

 

[Garaw]

It's mostly just an extremely strained mechanic for class balance.

D&D has always gone the route of either:
a) Armor interferes with spellcasting, either by making somatic components clumsy or due to the metal itself interfering with arcane energies.
b) Mages aren't trained and drilled in the proper use of armor.

I think there's a tendency away from this nowadays. But even 3.5 separated magical wards and mundane armor by making some of the bonuses fail to stack, I think.

If I remember right, 4th edition makes it possible. You just have to spend cumulative feats to get trained with a higher tier of armor. Feats that could have been spent on something, you know, wizardly.