[AEC] Multiclass MU (p. 24)

[Urieal]

On p.24 of the AEC, it notes that mutli-class MUs can use any armor (emphasis mine):

Cleric/Magic-User, Fighter/Magic-User, Fighter/Illusionist: These characters may use sharp objects and any armor.

Is this correct? Am I to assume that multi-class MUs can cast in armor?

I never played 1E or 2E this way, I always assumed that any multiclassed MU cannot cast while in armor.

Is this a typo?


Perhaps the Cleric/Magic-User from this paragraph should be moved up with the other notes for Cleric/*, since it doesn't specifically say that Cleric/MU can use sharp weapons (implied, yes; explicit, no).
Perhaps the */MU should say "cannot cast while in armor"?

That seems right, but I may be missing something.

[aspiringlich]

Yep, that's how it is, both in AEC and AD&D. Which is why enforcing level limits is a must. And yes, multi-classed clerics are allowed sharp weapons. One of these days I'm just going to nix multi-classing altogether. It just reeks of min-maxing.

[Wizardawn]

I know you just asked a simple question, but I like pointing THIS out whenever I can because it is one of my favorite articles. It takes the multi-class options and turns them into a single class to manage...giving them better names than fighter-cleric for example.

[Urieal]

Yep, that's how it is, both in AEC and AD&D. Which is why enforcing level limits is a must. And yes, multi-classed clerics are allowed sharp weapons. One of these days I'm just going to nix multi-classing altogether. It just reeks of min-maxing.

That's not how it was in 2E. The 2E book is very explicit. On p. 45 of the original cover and p. 62 of the black cover...

A multi-classed wizard can freely combine the powers of the wizard with any other class allowed, although the wearing of armor is restricted.

It's odd, to me, that 1E allows spellcasting in armor (I am totally cool with elves in elven chain doing it), but restricts thieving .

Apparently, Gary's intent was only for Elves to have this special ability, as he enforced that in his own game. Check here.

I know you just asked a simple question, but I like pointing THIS out whenever I can because it is one of my favorite articles. It takes the multi-class options and turns them into a single class to manage...giving them better names than fighter-cleric for example.

Those are OK, I'd rather let the PC come up with their own name if they cared to do such a thing. It also codifies what is speculation about 1E (that fighter/MU can use armor). I've never, ever, played that way, and I've played a fair shake of 1E in my day (used to play it rather exclusively until 2E came out).

[aspiringlich]

I never played 2e except for a brief stint last year. I'm really not familiar with it. I stopped playing D&D before 2e was released, so whenever you hear me talk about AD&D, I'm almost invariably referring to 1e.

[Black Wyvern]

Below are the 1e rules. Only fighter cleric multi-class are allowed all weapons in AD&D. But as the AEC thief has access to all weapons vs. the AD&D 1e thief who has a very limited selection, allowing all weapons to cleric/thieves would seem to be aligned to the intent of the parent system.

Page 32-33 1e PHB
Cleric combinations (with fighter types) may use edged weapons.

Cleric/Fighter: This combination is strong in defensive and revitalization capabilities, plus the offensive missile and melee combat power of the fighter. Hit points average will be good. Half-elves and half-orcs may be cleric/fighters.

Cleric/Magic-user: This combination gives the character a great variety and selection of spells,as well as the use of armor and more weapons. Hit points are somewhat better than those of the magic-user class alone. Half-elves may be cleric/magic-users.

Fighter/Magic-user: Obviously, this combination allows excellent armor protection, the use of weaponry, and spells. Hit points are good on the average (5% +2% = 8 + 2 = 4 hit points per double-classed level). Elves and half-elves may be fighter/magic-users.