Oblivious Presents: Mages, Wizards and General Magic Users.

[Cpt_Oblivious]

Well there's a fair few answers to choose from here, my favourite being:

Hey, sometimes a mage just needs to feel pretty.

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 Furburt [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.166399#4415377] is right. One guy did it and the others followed. It became a convention and no one wishes to deviate from it.

 

[RyQ_TMC]

Here's one more idea for you, oh Captain my Captain:

Mark of status. In most fantasy settings, wizards aren't that ubiquitous (hell, even in those where every adventuring party has a spellcaster they seem to be rarely featured in the background). They are often portrayed as a sort of exclusive group (not uncommonly even freely communicating with wizards from politically rival factions), feared by commoners. There's generally some arrogance in there, too. So the robes serve as a clear identification of "here's the guy who can make your brain fly out through your ears and your urine boil". Most magic systems include a few easy protection spells to prevent mundane damage anyway.

Come to think of it, isn't that the exact reason Discworld wizards never take off their hats?

The first goes back to the Middle Ages when being educated was practically a punishable offense, and robes (along with a hood usually), were great for blending into a crowd of plague victims who often wore fully body robes to conceal their pustules.

Ummmm... How about those wacky monks who spent their life on getting educated in monasteries and wore hooded robes?

Or those equally wacky teachers at medieval universities, who also wore robes as mark of their status?

 

[More Fun To Compute]

In games where mages don't have restrictions on warrior stuff everyone plays as a battle mage type character. This might be fine in a single player game like elder scrolls but in a multiplayer or party based game it tends to subvert the purpose of having a character class system. Some people might say that those systems are pretty stupid and need a gosh darned good old subverting but the alternatives are often more boring in terms of actually playing the game and not being bored.

Most game systems really fail to capture things like magic being something, well, magical while being hit with a sword really hurts and isn't something that can happen to you hundreds of times without long term damage. Magic men not being clever enough to hold swords or wear leather jackets is also silly.

 

[Altorin]

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?

I was going to say that the bolded part is the most important part, but then I was reminded that powerful wizards have access to things that are just as good as armor, including armor spells and in D&D Bracers of Armor, which are like wearing a weightless suit of plate mail around your wrists.

So being a powerful wizard doesn't mean that armor will break you mechanically.

I think it's just the traditional asthetic of what a traditional wizard is. Like everything in fantasy, you can probably blame tolkien. He gave us graceful arrow shooting elves, mithril loving axe-wielding dwarves, and Gandalf.

For 30 years of roleplaying, the easiest way to explain what a wizard is to a new player is to say "He's like Gandalf". Elminster? He's like Gandalf. Dumbledore? He's like Gandalf. Raistlin? He's like Gandalf.. only without the beard.

If it weren't for Tolkien, Elves would still be mischevous faeries, dwarves would still be tree-dwelling miners singing hi-ho, and gandalf... well, he'd probably still be gandalf.

 

[Trilby]

In WoW I have a mage, and put it this way, if I had his abilities in a real combat situation; that is, being able to become invisible, teleport around the battlefield like a pingpong ball on steroids, call rains of ice from the sky and generally make everything explode and/or turn into a sheep just by looking at it, I wouldn't be bothering with heavy, awkward armour.

There's simply no need for physical armour when I have a superior magical version. Obviously, this reasoning doesn't apply to all mages etc throughout fantasy, but I think the key point is that unlike the hulking melee classes, mages don't need armour. There's simply no point.

 

[Cpt_Oblivious]

In WoW I have a mage, and put it this way, if I had his abilities in a real combat situation; that is, being able to become invisible, teleport around the battlefield like a pingpong ball on steroids, call rains of ice from the sky and generally make everything explode and/or turn into a sheep just by looking at it, I wouldn't be bothering with heavy, awkward armour.

But also, one backstab from an invisible rogue or one long range shot or unseen trap from a hunter and you're worm food. It works both ways.

 

[atol]

Diversity... Mages get stuck with robes because it makes a bit of sense and increases diversity among armor types.
Armor being heavy is half true, one who spends all their time training the mind will not be as physically strong as one who trains their body. Even light armor can be constricting and cumbersome. But still, both mind and body can be trained independently. A mage who constantly runs across the battlefield casting spells should eventually become endurant enough to throw on some basic armor, whether or not they'd be able to withstand more blows with it. I guess it depends on your mythos, Tarutarus work a bit differently from Jaina Proudmoore.

 

[TMAN10112]

I suppose that mages, wizards, and the like are assumed to have some sort of magical protection against physical threats that they can utilize anyways.

Mages wouldn't wear plate, mail, or other types of armour for the same reason that a sniper wouldn't wear a Dragon-Skin vest (the most effective bullet-resistant vest to date); Because they're hot, heavey, and limit mobility. It's your job to stay out of the line of fire and do damage from a distance, so sacrificing mobility for protection wouldn't be worth it.

 

[Altorin]

tends to be play balance in rpgs. a soldier equiped in plate mail is hard to kill at the best of times without giving him the ability to cast offensive magic as well like a fireball.

In RPGs where Wizards come into play, I don't think armor is that much of a balancing factor. It UNBALANCES the game in the beginning actually. And eventually, armor isn't an issue at all. The wizard can have just as much armor as a fighter using spells and magic items. Inversely a fighter can have almost as much destructive capabilities as a wizard given proper use of magic items.

All a wizard's traditional "armor-less" archetype serves to do from a balance standpoint in traditional RPGs is set-up wizard players to have a complex. It sets Wizards to truly be the Nerd Children of the roleplaying world.. "You will definitely suck when you're young, but when you grow big and strong, you'll show them.. you'll show them all! Mwa ha ha!"

Wizards at low levels can do hardly any real damage at all (at least before 4th edition came along). They have only a few spells, must choose between spells that help them adventure and spells that actually do damage, if an enemy chooses to focus on them, even for a short time, they're worm-food, and to top it off, if they run out of spells, they're stuck using their scrawny little arms to swing a quarterstaff or throw stones like a common thug.

Lack of Armor doesn't balance wizards.. it kicks them when they're down, at least as long as armor matters.

 

[TheDoctor455]

Here's one more idea for you, oh Captain my Captain:

Mark of status. In most fantasy settings, wizards aren't that ubiquitous (hell, even in those where every adventuring party has a spellcaster they seem to be rarely featured in the background). They are often portrayed as a sort of exclusive group (not uncommonly even freely communicating with wizards from politically rival factions), feared by commoners. There's generally some arrogance in there, too. So the robes serve as a clear identification of "here's the guy who can make your brain fly out through your ears and your urine boil". Most magic systems include a few easy protection spells to prevent mundane damage anyway.

Come to think of it, isn't that the exact reason Discworld wizards never take off their hats?

The first goes back to the Middle Ages when being educated was practically a punishable offense, and robes (along with a hood usually), were great for blending into a crowd of plague victims who often wore fully body robes to conceal their pustules.

Ummmm... How about those wacky monks who spent their life on getting educated in monasteries and wore hooded robes?

Or those equally wacky teachers at medieval universities, who also wore robes as mark of their status?

Even these were treated with suspicion. Knowledge is power after all.
One thing to keep in mind about monks is that not all of them were from the same religion, so in Europe, any non-christian (or non-catholic anyway) was deemed a "heretic" or "blasphemer".
And teachers at medieval universities were often prime targets for similar accusations and later, the Inquisition.