Cloak of Mage Armor

[Nifft]

The reason I consider the Shield Ring over priced is that there is a base item that has the same effect for the vast majority of encounters (depending on campaign) for 1/4 the cost.

Does a buckler grant its AC bonus when a PC uses both hands to attack? IMHO the Shield Ring is priced to not be a no-brainer while your barbarian is saving up for his animated adamantine heavy shield +5.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Slaved]

My view is that the bracers of armor are balanced around the cost of increasing the AC bonus on armors. This makes sense to me since each class is designed to have access to certain items, and abilities. The classes are balance around these restrictions. A fighter not being able to cast spells is a restriction on his capabilities, just as a wizard/monks inability to use armor. Thus by giving more armor for less cost for bracers it throws off this balance between the classes, since it would allow the non-armored classes a faster AC progression. Saying that it is ok to have this imbalance in items since class X is gimpy does not justify an imbalance in items. If class X is gimpy then change class X not an item that is usable by anybody. Even if you can only forsee class X using the item at the moment, there is no telling what the future will hold, and I personally prefer to use rule 0 as evenly and rarely as possible. (since if it becomes broken in the future you have to reverse course on the ruling)

Which Classes will really want the Bracers of Armor? Wizards and Sorcerers could use the Armor that I Posted earlier. They will get a better Armor Bonus for less Gold. It had no Armor Check Penalty or Arcane Spell Failure.

So the only Class that is badly hurt by the Overpriced Bracers of Armor is the Monk. I do not think that the Monk is Overpowered and I do not think that Pricing the Bracers of Armor lower would make the Monk Overpowered. The Monk already has to contend with the Amulet of Mighty Fists and Multiple Attribute Dependency.

 

[Slaved]

Does a buckler grant its AC bonus when a PC uses both hands to attack? IMHO the Shield Ring is priced to not be a no-brainer while your barbarian is saving up for his animated adamantine heavy shield +5.

Cheers, -- N

Does the Ring of Force Shield let the Player Character use both hands to Attack?

Force Shield

An iron band, this simple ring generates a shield-sized (and shield-shaped) wall of force that stays with the ring and can be wielded by the wearer as if it were a heavy shield (+2 AC). This special creation has no armor check penalty or arcane spell failure chance since it is weightless and encumbrance-free. It can be activated and deactivated at will as a free action.

Moderate evocation; CL 9th; Forge Ring, wall of force; Price 8,500 gp.

Does the Bolded Section mean a Character uses a hand to Wield the Shield as they would a normal Heavy Shield?

 

[ardentmoth]

I did use the wrong Logical Fallacy to describe what was happening. That does not stop what was being done from being a Logical Fallacy however.

I believe that Appeal to Ridicule is a much better description.

I agree, the whole thing is ridiculous, lol.

and yes, they can wield the wall of force as if it were a shield.

 

[s-dub]

I like this comparison. Both use the Ring slot, costs are very similar.

The trade-offs are:
- Shield Ring is a less common magical bonus (only the shield spell grants one, while there are many spells which grant a Deflection bonus), so it stacks well; but
- Ring of Protection works against more attack types (Deflection is "better").

Since a shield bonus is so rare, I'd be cool charging +16% over the base cost of the Protection ring.

Cheers, -- N

I disagree on this one. The shield ring description reads:

Force Shield
An iron band, this simple ring generates a shield-sized (and shield-shaped) wall of force that stays with the ring and can be wielded by the wearer as if it were a heavy shield (+2 AC). This special creation has no armor check penalty or arcane spell failure chance since it is weightless and encumbrance-free. It can be activated and deactivated at will as a free action.

A RoP requires no hands, and this seems to indicate a hand is needed.

This if you are flat footed you wouldn't get this bonus (though it probably would apply to inc touch ac)

I think that the best comparison would be a +1 mithril buckler

I rue the day that my PC's find out about +5 mithril buckers with the improved buckler defense feat. They are hard enough to hit as it =P.

 

[Folly]

Does a buckler grant its AC bonus when a PC uses both hands to attack? IMHO the Shield Ring is priced to not be a no-brainer while your barbarian is saving up for his animated adamantine heavy shield +5.

Cheers, -- N

I am not saying that it is vastly overpriced, just overpriced. Besides why would a barbarian want an adamantine shield. Between the headache of not having rules for applying adamantine to shields and DR from different sources seems kinda pointless.

VanRichten - you need to look at the additional costs for multiple effects and also the item slot synergy table. Cloaks are considered defensive items, thus would not have the 50% bonus cost for being a non-synergistic slot. Further when you have multiple effects on one item, there is a 50% increase in cost of all effects except for the most expensive. Thus with a shield and mage armor effect, the mage armor is the cheaper of the two and would have the additional 50% tacked on. The MIC clarifies the rules for having multiple effects on one item. Since by base DMG it depends on the order inwhich you enchant it. Thus with the exception of upgrading an item as you go along it will always be on the cheaper (since as the craft you pick to do the most expensive one first). The MIC also changes it such that upgrading works the same way as base crafting (the 50% is never on the expensive component).

 

[Folly]

Which Classes will really want the Bracers of Armor? Wizards and Sorcerers could use the Armor that I Posted earlier. They will get a better Armor Bonus for less Gold. It had no Armor Check Penalty or Arcane Spell Failure.

So the only Class that is badly hurt by the Overpriced Bracers of Armor is the Monk. I do not think that the Monk is Overpowered and I do not think that Pricing the Bracers of Armor lower would make the Monk Overpowered. The Monk already has to contend with the Amulet of Mighty Fists and Multiple Attribute Dependency.

By changing the price as you have suggested you make almost every light armor in the game completely useless, this relatively weakens the classes that have light armor proficiency since that class feature has lost almost all meaning. And as my argument states, a class being underpowered is not a valid reason to change an items price. Thus it not being too good because monks are weaker in your mind and they are the ones who would benefit most is a flawed argument. If monks are too weak change monks.

 

[Slaved]

By changing the price as you have suggested you make almost every light armor in the game completely useless, this relatively weakens the classes that have light armor proficiency since that class feature has lost almost all meaning. And as my argument states, a class being underpowered is not a valid reason to change an items price. Thus it not being too good because monks are weaker in your mind and they are the ones who would benefit most is a flawed argument. If monks are too weak change monks.

How does the Price Change I proposed make Light Armor useless?

My Arguement is based on considering the Optimal Use of the Bracers of Armor and seeing that they come up as Overpriced in that comparison. The further Arguement that Monks would not be Overpowered with the change is to round out the Arguement rather than to further it.

 

[Nifft]

A RoP requires no hands, and this seems to indicate a hand is needed.

If that's the reading used in your campaign, I can easily see how it would be overpriced. Let's say readings vary, and price should conform to the appropriate reading.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Folly]

How does the Price Change I proposed make Light Armor useless?

My Arguement is based on considering the Optimal Use of the Bracers of Armor and seeing that they come up as Overpriced in that comparison. The further Arguement that Monks would not be Overpowered with the change is to round out the Arguement rather than to further it.

Since you proposed Bracers of Armor +4 costing 1000 and progress as normal, that means that every thing but chain shirt and mithral breast blate (unless you have crazy dex then those are not worth it either) are the only light armors anyone would use. This is because a +1 Studded Leather provides +4 armor but has the restrictions of armor and does not protect against incorporials.

You compare the cost of the bracers to class abilities. This is not a fair comparison. It should be compared against other magic items. The only magic item that makes it seem overpowered is the one that emulates Mage Armor. But there is not such an item base, and thus as per the rules for making magic items if an existing item exists you refer to its price. Thus you cannot use the item that emulates mage armor for comparison since it doesn't pass the rules for making magic items. Compared to every other magic source that increases AC bracers are as cheap as it gets.

Getting an enhancement bonus on armor cost the same amount.

Natural and deflection cost 100% as much.

All others cost 150% as much.

Armor proficiency is an ability of each class. Thus the mundane AC bonus are a part of the class similar to a monks dodge bonus or wisdom bonus. Armor uses have the additional cost of the armor while monks/wizards/sorcerers have restrictions from using armor at all.