Bracers that stack?

[Greenfield]

I was looking through the Arms and Equipment Guide this morning (trying to track down an item on a PC sheet) and saw something unexpected.

I can't recall the exact name right now, but the item was a set of non-magical arm guards, essentially "bracers", that gave a +1 to AC, and stacked with both armor and shield.

In theory, you could have them enchanted to give a higher bonus, couldn't you?

Somebody tell me I'm seeing that wrong, please?

<Edit> Found the item.

Dastana:
This pair of metal bracers can be worn in addition to some other types of armor to provide an additional armor bonus that stacks with both the foundation armor and any shield worn. You can wear dastana with padded, leather, or chain shirt armor.

You need the Armor Proficiency (light) feat to wear dastana without penalty.

 

[Nezkrul]

there already is a similar item in the DMG, the insight bonus of +1 to ac Ioun Stone; the item is priced as a slot-less item, so if it were made as bracers it would be 2500gp x (bonus ^ 2)

 

[aglondier]

If you want to really stack the bonuses, there is also Luck, Holy/Profane, Deflection, Competence, Enhancement, Natural Armour, Eldritch, Racial, Inherant, and quite frankly just about anything else you can con you GM into letting you have. Had a mage running around with an AC of 40 with room to flex if I had wanted to expand...

 

[Greenfield]

There are a lot of bonuses you can add to AC. Dastana allow you to add to Light armor, like a chain shirt, and keep it in the "light armor" category.

And while there are a lot of AC enhancement bonuses, most of them take a slot for the item. You can run yourself out of item slots pretty easy.

The "arm" slot is seldom used, other than for Bracers, and for a person already wearing armor there are bloody few bracers woth the cost. Since these are an armor item in that slot, you could make them out of Mythral to reduce weight and penalties, then have them enchanted as high as +5 (like any other armor item).

It just seems odd: A Wizard wears them and they match Bracers of Armor, in terms of cost and effectiveness. (Okay, they don't stop non-corporeal creatures the same way.) But then the wearer can add armor and/or a shield and they stack.

 

[Empirate]

Pro tip: use armor/shield spikes on everything where they'll go, enchant them with the Defending property, get your friendly neighbourhood wizard to renew some Greater Magic Weapon spells on them each morning, enjoy your sky-high AC. Until something comes along that doesn't care about AC, that is...

 

[Greenfield]

Okay, so you put them on your armor, your shield, *AND* on Dastana, *AND* on your spiked Gauntlets.

With GMW bumping by up to 5, and four places for armor spikes, I'm seeing 20 points of AC bonus.

That is *soooooo* wrong.

 

[Jackinthegreen]

Okay, so you put them on your armor, your shield, *AND* on Dastana, *AND* on your spiked Gauntlets.

With GMW bumping by up to 5, and four places for armor spikes, I'm seeing 20 points of AC bonus.

That is *soooooo* wrong.

Yes, it is actually wrong. Wrong in the sense of "isn't properly supported by the rules." Untyped bonuses from the same source do not stack, and the same source in this case is the Defending property. Only one can work at a time.

And even if a case could be made that it's rules legal, it doesn't pass the BS test. The idea that stacking Defending weapons works should be murdered.

 

[Greenfield]

Normally I'd agree with you 100%.

But the description of the Defending bonus says that it "Stacks with everything"

So this one has an explicit exception to that rule.

 

[Herzog]

Even when it stacks with everything, it doesn't stack with itself.

 

[Empirate]

Even when it stacks with everything, it doesn't stack with itself.

Well, it's several different defending weapons, which stack with each other. And it's not as if you didn't spend a lot of gold on this trick. At the level where that kind of gold is available, and you can get reliable access to CL 15+ Greater Magic Weapon, sky-high AC is nice, for sure, but not that gamebreaking anymore. I'd probably not allow it in my game (if only for the pure silly involved), but I believe it's rules-legal, and not completely unbalancing.