Originally Posted by Dimers
How about the legacy of arcane spell failure for armor use? When 4e came out, I thought that ridiculosity had ended, but no, it rears its stupid head in the 5e playtest too ... From a balance perspective, I can sorta kinda vaguely understand it (but can't understand why they would then allow workarounds), but there is no in-game reason for it that can't get logicked away in two seconds.
Ooh, and adventuring being better practice for wizardry than day-in, day-out study of the arcane in a well-equipped laboratory!
And all 2e rangers being specialized in two-weapon fighting! Because there's nothing better for protecting a forest than a sword-and-dagger combo.
Finally: the Deck of Many Things. /thread
In 3e & 3.5, Arcane Spell Failure only applies to spells with a Somatic (body movement) component, just like Silence only gives a spell failure chance to spells with a Verbal component.
As for adventuring Wizards... well... actually seeing the real-world effects of magic, encountering magical creatures, encountering different ways of using magic, being forced to "think on your feet", etc...
Of course, back in 2e, Wizards got 50xp/spell level for every spell they cast and Clerics got 100xp/spell level for every spell they cast... so players had to decide if they wanted to blow all their spells before camping, or keep some in case there was an encounter at night!
Thieves also got 1xp for each gold-piece equivalent value they stole
. so, if the thief could sneak in while the party was fighting the dragon, they could get rediculous amounts of xp (and say "huh, this dragon wasn't very wealthy...")