Weapons & Armors Restrictions Reboot

[raisin]

Hi! I didn't want to necro an old thread and couldn't find the answer to my query so, here I come with a reboot thread.

Here's what my copy says on weapons and armors restrictions:

All magical weaponry is useable by fighters and this itself is a big advantage [because most magic weapons are swords, right.]

The whole plethora of enchanted items lies at the magic-users beck and call, save for the arms and armors of the fighter.
Magic-Users may arm themselves with daggers only.

Clerics [...] have the use of magic armor and all non-edged magic weapons (no arrows!)

[Elves] may use magic armor and still act as magic-users.

Men & Magic, p.7-8

It seems to me like the only actual restrictions are for magical and not mundane weaponry. Save maybe for the MU's weapons, and even then, it could be interpreted as "may use no magical weapons, aside from daggers", since all weaponry mentioned so far was specified to be magic.

The only thing that really bothers me with that interpretation is that I prefer ranged weapons to be Fighter territory, but then again I can just specify that in my house rules.

My questions are: why is it written in such a way if the reality of play at the time was that these restrictions applied to mundane weaponry from the start? Why specify "magical" then? If the Cleric's inspiration wielded a named sword, why prevent the class from using mundane swords, since it doesn't upset the "balance" of Magic Swords reserved to Fighters?

What is it that I'm missing here?

[coffee]

As I understand it, it was written that way because the particular section dealt with magic items each character class could use. While I believe the intent was that the character class in question could also only use mundane versions of the same weapons, it is not explicitly stated.

But then, in The Strategic Review #3, while responding to a review of D&D by Arnold Hendrick, Gygax dismisses the man's understanding of the game because:

he had gone so far as to play a game of D&D as a Cleric, completely armed with such edged weapons as spear and arrows . . .

which then implies that non-magical weapons are similarly restricted.

[Deleted]

"Clerics cannot used edged weapons" is folklore that long predates D&D.

"Magic users may arm themselves with daggers only" does not mean "magic users may arm themselves with magical daggers only." It means EXACTLY what it says.

I personally think the lack of clarity is the result of the text being rushed to print.

[raisin]

Thanks y'all. I'll reference this thread if I get confused in the future.

[Deleted]

I’m guessing this is the best version of this to necro...

In my current campaign we take the text, with the 3 LBBs as the cutoff, literally. Armor and weapon restrictions are for magic items, where bonuses that impact the “to hit” number come into play.

If a magic user wants to wear regular leather or chain and use a sword, go for it. If a cleric wants to use a bow or flintlock (yes, I recognize we are also outside the default setting), that is fine.

But we also pay close attention to coin weight, and in our game spell/prayer books weigh 100 coins, which is extremely generous. Chain armor is equivalent to five levels of spell books, 500 gold or 25 pieces of jewelry. This is significant.