Armour proficiency?

[Dr Mushroom]

What precisely does armour proficiency do? It doesn't seem to add any bonuses, so a wizard in cloth when he could be in leather (no movement or skill penalties) just seems stupid. Or perhaps particularly dedicated to roleplaying at the cost of 2 AC.

[Tegu8788]

They give bonuses to AC, and allow you to get different kinds of magic armor. You wouldn't expect a Paladin to run around in robes, would you?

[Dr Mushroom]

They give bonuses to AC, and allow you to get different kinds of magic armor. You wouldn't expect a Paladin to run around in robes, would you?
I think you misunderstood what I asked. I meant that if being proficient in armour doesn't confer a defence bonus, then why in God's name would ANYONE run around in robes?

[Epinephrine]

To avoid attack roll penalties:

If an adventurer wears armor that he or she does not have proficiency with, the armor makes the adventurer clumsy and uncoordinated: That character takes a -2 penalty to attack rolls and to Reflex.

A -2 to your attack rolls is a pretty big penalty.

[NecroRebel]

If you aren't proficient in the use of an armor, you take a -2 penalty to attack rolls and your Reflex defense while wearing it. See PHB1 p.212. Since attack bonuses are considered tremendously important (much more so than AC bonuses), people don't wear armor they're not proficient in.

[Ashdate]

I think you misunderstood what I asked. I meant that if being proficient in armour doesn't confer a defence bonus, then why in God's name would ANYONE run around in robes?

Merely being proficient in armour doesn't confer a defense bonus in-and-of-itself (you would have to wear said armour after all), but it does allow you to use the armour without penalty.

Wearing armour you're not proficient in applies a -2 penalty to attack rolls and Reflex saves, so your Wizard can totally run around in full plate if they wish, but aside from likely using up a good chunk of their carrying capacity (and losing their Int bonus to AC), they'll be taking said penalty to all their attacks.

Additionally (although perhaps not as importantly), the Paragon Armor Specialization feats require proficiency to obtain, and they're generally solid (if not spectacular) feats.

[Dr Mushroom]

Thanks. Couldn't find anything about proficiencies anywhere the PHB.

[Dr Mushroom]

Merely being proficient in armour doesn't confer a defense bonus in-and-of-itself (you would have to wear said armour after all), but it does allow you to use the armour without penalty.

Wearing armour you're not proficient in applies a -2 penalty to attack rolls and Reflex saves, so your Wizard can totally run around in full plate if they wish, but aside from likely using up a good chunk of their carrying capacity (and losing their Int bonus to AC), they'll be taking said penalty to all their attacks.

Additionally (although perhaps not as importantly), the Paragon Armor Specialization feats require proficiency to obtain, and they're generally solid (if not spectacular) feats.

I once DM'd a wizard who wore full plate, carried a bastard sword, and had 10 int. When others in the party tried to convince him to change class, he simply replied "I like being a tank and being able to do magic at the same time." Really wish I'd known this rule back then.

[Ashdate]

Thanks. Couldn't find anything about proficiencies anywhere the PHB.

It's page 212 of the PHB, under "Armor Types".

A 10 Int Wiz with full plate, that might be an interesting character, but would be a terrible PC on account of having not only a near-dump ability in their prime attribute, but with the further -2 penalty to attack rolls I don't know why they would bother getting out of bed in the morning to go adventuring.

There are much better ways to be a "tank" and use magic in 4e :)

[Dr Mushroom]

It's page 212 of the PHB, under "Armor Types".
There are much better ways to be a "tank" and use magic in 4e :)

That's what we kept telling him!

[NecroRebel]

He probably would've had better AC if he had just maxed out his Int, worn hide armor, and used the Staff of Defense feature. For quite a while, Wizards so built were actually the AC champions.

If he wanted to be a magic-using swordsman, the Swordmage class would've been right up his alley.

[VeliciaL]

As far as a Wizard in armor goes, there is also the feat Unarmored Agility which gives +2 AC in cloth (or no) armor. It's generally recommended Wizards take either that or Leather proficiency sometime in their career.

I've played around with a "battlemage" build that uses various feats to pump AC pretty high. It's remarkable easy to do.


If he wanted to be a magic-using swordsman, the Swordmage class would've been right up his alley.

To be fair this could have been before Swordmage came out, or without access to the Forgotten Realms book.

I agree though, if a Wizard wants high AC they're better off with high Int.

[Dr Mushroom]

I think this might be straying off-topic here...

[VeliciaL]

I think this might be straying off-topic here...

To be fair, your question was answered in the first few posts. :P Discussions don't tend to stop after that though.