Prompted by a query in the Lost and Found
Wizards are often the fantasy equivalent of heavy artillery
, capable of wiping out armies by themselves from afar. And like heavy artillery, you don't want them in close combat because they're relatively easy to kill
if you can get to them. So why don't they wear armor so they last longer?
Some settings justify this by having the armor apply a penalty to the mage's powers. This may be because magic requires precise Magical Gestures
that are made more difficult by armor's weight. Others use the solution that magic requires such intense study that there's no time to learn how to use armor properly. In still other settings, iron is antithetical to magic by its very nature
, though this still raises the question of why mages are rarely seen wearing at least some form of protective leather instead of a Robe and Wizard Hat
In gaming the trope is most commonly used as a way to compensate for Quadratic Wizards
for the purpose of game balance
. It may manifest as spellcasting characters being restricted on which types of armor they can equip, if any, or apply a penalty to the potency of the spell. The trope has been around long enough for that purpose it's arguably achieved Necessary Weasel
Compare Armor Is Useless
. Contrast Magic Knight
, the most common manifestation of this trope's aversion.
Video game examples:
- The .hack R1 Games have 3 levels of armour, with Wavemasters only being able to wear the lightest version.
- Fortune Summoners justifies this In-Universe. The main character, Arche, is the only one who can wear metal armour and use a sword because she doesn't rely on magic (because she can't cast it until the end, where she becomes able to do a Fusion Dance with an air elemental), which large metal objects interfere with.
- In Dissidia: Final Fantasy, Golbez wears full black armor as in his original game, but is a fully magic fighter. Gilgamesh then lampshades this trope by calling out to him that if he's a wizard, he should dress the part.
- In Diablo II this happens in a roundabout way. A character's ability to wear a piece of armour (aside from level and any specific class restrictions on an item) more often than not depends on how many stat points are in STR. The result is that the 'pure' mage classes (necromancers and sorceresses) can't wear the heaviest armour because the player has likely put most of their stat points into INT. In other words, they can't wear the armour because they're squishy, and they're squishy because they train their minds more than their bodies.
[[folder:Multiplayer Online Battle Arenas]]
- Played with in Bungie's Myth universe. Mages have no restriction against wearing armor. They generally still don't since they often have magical protection which would render armor redundant, but some wear armor anyway. For example, Balor The Leveler was an archmage who went full Tin Tyrant for no other reason than it made him look more intimidating. Likewise, Alric would eventually wear a custom suit of Heron Guard armor to signify his possession of the Ibis Crown and ascension to Emperor of Cath Bruig.
- This is used in the Fire Emblem series, with magicians generally drawn in robes and having a low physical defense score. The sword cuts both ways, though: armored units are frequently just as bad at fending off magical attacks.
- Likewise, Shining Force follows this trope to a tee.
- Downplayed in the Disgaea series. Apart from weapons there aren't any restrictions on what equipment characters can equip, so it's very possible to equip mages with armors without any hindrance to damage output. However, the effectiveness of equipment is determined by the class's Aptitudes. Mages generally have low DEF Aptitudes, and thus get less DEF bonus from equipment.
- In Knights of the Old Republic wearing any armor other than Jedi robes means that certain Force powers are unusable. The sequel adds a few types of armor specifically designed for Force users that do not have this effect.
- Project Eternity may avert this. Information from the developers states that the setting's primitive black powder firearms are effective at piercing spellcasters' spell shields at close range, so mages have turned to bulletproof plate as a countermeasure.
- The Elder Scrolls:
- The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion imposes a penalty on any spells cast while wearing armor, based on how skilled your character is at wearing that type of armor; spells cast while wearing an armor your character is completely untrained in will have only 80% effectiveness, while a master of armor will cast at 95% effectiveness.
- Skyrim changes it up a little. Spells work just as well with armor as without, but the Alteration skill tree has a perk, "Mage Armor," that adds a multiplier to protective spells like Stoneflesh if the caster is unarmored.
- In the Dragon Age series, magic and heavy armor don't mix for two reasons: heavier armor sets tend to have high requirements on Strength, which the mages generally don't develop, and also make casting spells more expensive, effectively reducing their mana pools. It is, however, possible to subvert this in Dragon Age: Origins if you manage to unlock the Arcane Warrior mage specialization, which checks Strength restrictions against your Magic score instead.
- In Drakensang (which is based on The Dark Eye, below), magic users are able to equip anything; however they are completely blocked from casting spells if they wear only one single piece of metal armor (with exceptions).
Non-video game examples:
- As with many tropes common in Role-Playing Games, Dungeons & Dragons is the Trope Codifier.
- Basic D&D. In the Holmes (1977), Moldvay (1981) and Mentzer (1983) Basic sets and the Rules Cyclopedia (1991), magic users could not wear armor.
- In 1st and 2nd Edition Advanced D&D, magic users/wizards were simply forbidden to wear armor under the standard rules. There were exceptions made in later supplements, such as 2nd Edition kits which allowed a wizard with that kit to wear armor.
- In 3.X Edition arcane casters can wear armor if they take a proficiency feat, but if they do they risk a percentage chance that the spell will fail to cast, justified as the armor interfering with the gestures involved in spellcasting. Bards and the add-on classes warmage and warlock can wear light armor without hitting this restriction, and can take a feat, "Armored Caster", to be able to wear medium armor without risking spell failure. Of course, a wizard with skill in the schools of transmutation and abjuration doesn't necessarily need armor since they can protect themselves quite well with their spells.
- Also from 3.X Edition, druids are only allowed to wear armor (and other equipment) made from "natural" materials (wood, hides, stone, etc.) or else their powers are unusable. With just the core rulebooks (Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, and Monster Manual) this restricts druids to wearing light armor or the weakest type of medium armor, but add-on books added some esoteric materials that are classified as natural and can be forged into heavier armors.
- In 4th Edition, there's no such thing as arcane spell failure, but wizards still have the worst armor proficiency. They simply don't care about proficiency because (as of Player's Handbook III) they can take a feat to have AC equivalent to leather and still wear those wonderful magic robes made specifically for them.
- In The Dark Eye, forged metal interferes with the flow of magical energies (with some rare exceptions) in such a way that it makes casting spells more difficult and prohibits the regeneration of Mana if a significant amount is worn close to a magic user's body. While magic users can wear anything not made out of metal (e.g. heavy leather), this is frowned upon by the Magician's Guilds as not befitting a wizard's standing, further restricting proper certified wizards to fancy robes and such.
- The Fantasy Trip penalizes wizards for wearing armor with a twofold justification. Ferrous metals interfere with magic, and armor itself interferes with spells' somatic components.