Spellcasting, Armor, and Restrained

[Rebonack]

Okay. So. The Restrained condition doesn't explicitly state that it halts spellcasting. It tells us that the Restrained creature can't move, has disadvantage on Dex saves, and disadvantage on attacks (and people have advantage attacking it). However, when we look at what wearing armor you aren't proficient in does-


If you wear armor that you lack proficiency with, you have disadvantage on any ability check, saving throw, or Attack roll that involves Strength or Dexterity, and you can’t cast Spells.


Because of the mental focus and precise gestures required for spellcasting, you must be proficient with the armor you are wearing to Cast a Spell. You are otherwise too distracted and physically hampered by your armor for spellcasting.

Too distracted and physically hampered to cast spells, huh?

Strapping on a breastplate is very distracting and physically hampering if you're aren't trained in its use. Arguably, getting trapped in a giant spider web, pinned face down in the dirt by a burly Grappler, or vigorously groped by E. Black Tentacles is arguable as hampering (if not more hampering) than pulling on an unfamiliar bit of armor.

Obviously not RAW. But what do you folks think about Restrained making somatic spell components impossible? Obviously that would make Subtle Spell and Misty Step all the more attractive, so it isn't as if casters would be totally without recourse.

[snickersnax]

Strapping on a breastplate is very distracting and physically hampering if you're aren't trained in its use. Arguably, getting trapped in a giant spider web, pinned face down in the dirt by a burly Grappler, or vigorously groped by E. Black Tentacles is arguable as hampering (if not more hampering) than pulling on an unfamiliar bit of armor.

Obviously not RAW. But what do you folks think about Restrained making somatic spell components impossible? Obviously that would make Subtle Spell and Misty Step all the more attractive, so it isn't as if casters would be totally without recourse.

I'm in favor of house rules to prevent spell casting when restrained including verbal. How hard is it to gag someone (ie restrain their mouth)?. More importantly, its humane to all captives, because you don't have to cut off hands and tongues just in case they are a caster.

[SharkForce]

nope. you're looking for a different status condition. one that, for example, doesn't allow you to use a longbow, or nunchuks, or stuff like that. if i can move my hands and arms around enough to hit something 9 times with a freaking glaive in 6 seconds as if i weren't entangled at all, i can move my hands and arms around enough to cast a spell.

[Rebonack]

nope. you're looking for a different status condition. one that, for example, doesn't allow you to use a longbow, or nunchuks, or stuff like that. if i can move my hands and arms around enough to hit something 9 times with a freaking glaive in 6 seconds as if i weren't entangled at all, i can move my hands and arms around enough to cast a spell.

Wearing armor you aren't proficient in doesn't prevent you from making weapon attacks, only imposes disadvantage on the attack roll.

Just like Restrained.

I'm not talking about the Grappled condition. That doesn't do anything aside from set movespeed to zero. Near as I can tell, Grappled just means you're hanging onto the guy's belt or whatever. He isn't going anywhere, but he isn't otherwise hindered.

[imanidiot]

nope. you're looking for a different status condition. one that, for example, doesn't allow you to use a longbow, or nunchuks, or stuff like that. if i can move my hands and arms around enough to hit something 9 times with a freaking glaive in 6 seconds as if i weren't entangled at all, i can move my hands and arms around enough to cast a spell.

This. If you're going to disallow somatic components you have to restrict melee and ranged attacks first.

[JBPuffin]

So the best way to neutralize a Wizard is to forcefully stick them in a suit of leather armor? Huh. You learn something new every day.
Also, not sure if your response to SharkForce needed to quote SharkForce, since I'm not seeing a connection between the two, but I've certainly done similar before.

I kind of have to agree on the "if you can still make attacks, you can still cast spells," but maybe force a concentration check to get said spell off?

[SharkForce]

Wearing armor you aren't proficient in doesn't prevent you from making weapon attacks, only imposes disadvantage on the attack roll.

Just like Restrained.

I'm not talking about the Grappled condition. That doesn't do anything aside from set movespeed to zero. Near as I can tell, Grappled just means you're hanging onto the guy's belt or whatever. He isn't going anywhere, but he isn't otherwise hindered.

yes. i know what the status condition does.

but there are 2 important differences when it comes to armour and spellcasting:

1) you opt into it. nobody can just inflict the "wearing armour" status on you. this one is super important, really. you wear armour if you choose to. it isn't a status effect that is going to suddenly happen out of nowhere in the middle of battle and leave you completely useless for the rest of the encounter.

2) legacy reasons. truthfully, the biggest reason you can't cast spells in non-proficient armour at all but can do it flawlessly with armour you are proficient in has pretty much everything to do with priests being able to wear armour (and being proficient in it) while casting spells in earlier editions, while wizards could not cast spells in armour (and were not proficient in it) in those same earlier editions.

now, there *are* status conditions that can be forced on you in the middle of the battle that make you unable to contribute, and as a result, those conditions are much more highly valued. there are no level 1 AoE spells that inflict the helpless condition because that would be all kinds of broken, and there are not a whole pile of monsters that just inflict 'helpless" with a regular at-will attack either, but restrained is all over the place; plenty of very low CR monsters cause it, it's available AoE from level 1, players have access to it at-will with ranger beast companions, and nets, it's basically all over the place, and that can be allowed because it is a relatively inoffensive status condition. you certainly don't want it on you, but it doesn't take you completely out of the fight either. it is far too common to be as devastating as you want it to be.

even if you've got this screwy idea that somehow making sure spellcasters get arbitrarily screwed over constantly is a balance mechanism, it's going to be applied at all the wrong times. restrained is everywhere; there's tons of low-CR monsters that inflict it, and level 1 is *not* the level where spellcasters need any sort of special nerf beatdown to make them feel even worse compared to the warriors at those levels.

if you want something to "balance" spellcasters (not that "you don't get to act, ever" is a good way to balance anything), then find something else. there's no reason to take a functioning mechanic and break it in a way that's going to make the game unplayable for people who want to play certain characters. if you hate spellcasters in your games that much, then grow a pair and just ban them, don't be a passive-aggressive jerkwad and pretend like you're allowing them while making them unplayable behind everyone's backs.

edit:


So the best way to neutralize a Wizard is to forcefully stick them in a suit of leather armor? Huh. You learn something new every day.

not really. there's very little that putting armour on someone can do that tying their hands, gagging them, taking away their spell component pouch/arcane focus, and blindfolding them can't do just as effectively. it might arguably be slightly more useful on sorcerers with subtle spell, but those should be as rare as hen's teeth.

[Rebonack]

This. If you're going to disallow somatic components you have to restrict melee and ranged attacks first.

But it does restrict ranged and melee attacks? Restrained inflicts attacks with disadvantage just like wearing uncomfortable armor does. The implication, then, is that somatic components require greater freedom of motion than using a weapon does as armor encumbrance makes the former impossible and the latter merely difficult.

Also keep in mind that this isn't just physical encumbrance making somatic components impossible. It's a combination of physical encumbrance and distraction, at least if we're going to believe the 'casting in armor' entry.



So the best way to neutralize a Wizard is to forcefully stick them in a suit of leather armor? Huh. You learn something new every day.

Prancibald's Helpful Armor Application
Range: 60 feet
Target: One humanoid wearing clothing or armor within range.
Components: VSM
Material: A bit of worked leather or a scrap of iron armor.
Duration: Concentration, up to one minute.
Casting time: 1 action
Level 3 Transmutation

You attempt to transmute the armor or clothing the target humanoid is wearing into either Leather Armor or Splint Mail, your choice. The target must succeed on a Charisma Save to will their apparel to remain unaltered lest they be helpfully equipped with a stylish new outfit.