Cloak of Mage Armor

[Slaved]

A bracer (or arm-guard) is a strap or sheath, commonly made of leather, stone, or plastic that covers the inside of an archer's arm to protect it while shooting. Bracers keep the inside of the archer's forearm from getting hurt by the string of the bow or the fletching of the arrow; they also prevent loose clothing from catching the bow string.

How is a bracer considered clothing?

It looks like you Copied this directly from Wikipedia. Why did you limit yourself to the First Paragraph?

A bracer (or arm-guard) is a strap or sheath, commonly made of leather, stone, or plastic that covers the inside of an archer's arm to protect it while shooting. Bracers keep the inside of the archer's forearm from getting hurt by the string of the bow or the fletching of the arrow; they also prevent loose clothing from catching the bow string. They normally cover the forearm only, but chest-guards are sometimes worn, usually by female archers, and other areas have at times been protected. With some combinations of non-baggy clothing and bows with a larger distance between the bow and the string, the archer may not need to wear any bracer.[1]

Stone wrist-guards from the European Bronze Age have been thought to be archery bracers, but a recent suggestion is that they were status symbols without practical function.[2] The two functions may of course be combined. The Navajo people have developed their "ketoh" bracers, using silver, turquoise, and other adornments. Ketoh decorations have a center motif, sometimes with a central ornament, and four curvilinear shapes that radiate toward the corners. Ketohs normally have a smooth leather surface on the inside of the arm and are thus still perfectly functional, but are normally used as items of personal and ritual adornment, or as works of art in their own right.

Bracers and Wrist Guards can be both Functional and Decorative. When I go Horse-Back Riding through Rough Wilderness, Hiking in Hazardous Locations, and Rock Climbing I Wear something that Functions like that. If my Normal Life was as Potentially Hazardous as a Player Characters I would Wear them every day!!!! They would be as much a part of my Normal Clothing as Sturdy Boots!!!

 

[Nifft]

Ah thanks. A Japanese like me often fail in distinguishing L sound from R sound.

Oh please, you're superb compared to an American like me who fails utterly to distinguish between those squiggle-picture-thingies y'all use.

(Well, except this one: の which is obviously a partial differential.)

"No kidding", -- N

 

[Slaved]

This is actually incorrect. This is like saying that having +1 padded armor and +2 Bracers of Armor and you get a +3 bonus to AC. The magic vestment is acting on the clothing, and not directly on your characters AC. Thus the spell increase the amount of armor being provided by the cloths. This means that the cloths provide X bonus and the bracers provide Y and they do not overlap.

It is not like saying that because the Padded Armor and Bracers of Armor are different Objects. In the case of the Spell the Outfit is being Targetted and the Bracers are part of that Outfit.

It is like saying having a Magic Vestment Spell of Caster Level 20 Cast onto the Padded Armor +1 will Stack with the Armor Bonus of the Armor but Overlap with the Enhancement already present.

 

[Folly]

It is not like saying that because the Padded Armor and Bracers of Armor are different Objects. In the case of the Spell the Outfit is being Targetted and the Bracers are part of that Outfit.

It is like saying having a Magic Vestment Spell of Caster Level 20 Cast onto the Padded Armor +1 will Stack with the Armor Bonus of the Armor but Overlap with the Enhancement already present.

Sorry, I misread the flow of the conversation. In such situation, it would work.

 

[Slaved]

Sorry, I misread the flow of the conversation. In such situation, it would work.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Saying that Bracers of Armor are Priced Correctly because they are the Same Price as Bracers of Armor is a Circular Argument.

I'm saying that Bracers of Armor are priced correctly, period, because that's the price in the book.

I'm saying that the Cloak of Mage Armor is only priced correctly if it's priced the same as +4 Bracers of Armor, because +4 Bracers of Armor are the most similar already-existing item (effectively identical, in fact).

But Enhancement Bonuses to Armor Class on an Item that Grants and Armor Bonus Stack. So the Outfit with Magic Vestment Cast on it will have an Armor Bonus from the Bracers and an Enhancement from the Spell. They would Stack.

If you consider the Bracers part of an outfit of regular clothing, then for the purposes of the Magic Vestment spell, they provide no armor bonus. That's what the Magic Vestment spell says to do with an outfit of regular clothing.

So while your 'outfit of regular clothing', including the Bracers, grants an armor bonus of, say, +6, the Magic Vestment spell applies a +3 (say) enhancement bonus to "no armor bonus", because the spell text defines the armor bonus of an outfit of regular clothing as "no armor bonus".

Because you're applying the enhancement bonus to a different armor bonus (or rather, 'no armor bonus'), you end up with your 'outfit of regular clothing' providing two armor bonuses - the original +6, and the enhanced 'no armor bonus' granting a total of +3. Two armor bonuses don't stack, and you're left with your original +6 from the Bracers.

Which is the same result you'd get by wearing Bracers and casting Magic Vestment on your clothes without trying to finesse things by claiming the Wondrous Item is just part of your clothes.

-Hyp.

 

[Folly]

I'm saying that Bracers of Armor are priced correctly, period, because that's the price in the book.

I'm saying that the Cloak of Mage Armor is only priced correctly if it's priced the same as +4 Bracers of Armor, because +4 Bracers of Armor are the most similar already-existing item (effectively identical, in fact).



If you consider the Bracers part of an outfit of regular clothing, then for the purposes of the Magic Vestment spell, they provide no armor bonus. That's what the Magic Vestment spell says to do with an outfit of regular clothing.

So while your 'outfit of regular clothing', including the Bracers, grants an armor bonus of, say, +6, the Magic Vestment spell applies a +3 (say) enhancement bonus to "no armor bonus", because the spell text defines the armor bonus of an outfit of regular clothing as "no armor bonus".

Because you're applying the enhancement bonus to a different armor bonus (or rather, 'no armor bonus'), you end up with your 'outfit of regular clothing' providing two armor bonuses - the original +6, and the enhanced 'no armor bonus' granting a total of +3. Two armor bonuses don't stack, and you're left with your original +6 from the Bracers.

Which is the same result you'd get by wearing Bracers and casting Magic Vestment on your clothes without trying to finesse things by claiming the Wondrous Item is just part of your clothes.

-Hyp.

And this is why I said, In such situation. Since its up to the DM as to how strict an interpretation to take.

 

[Slaved]

I'm saying that Bracers of Armor are priced correctly, period, because that's the price in the book.

I'm saying that the Cloak of Mage Armor is only priced correctly if it's priced the same as +4 Bracers of Armor, because +4 Bracers of Armor are the most similar already-existing item (effectively identical, in fact).

I am saying that the Bracers of Armor are Priced Incorrectly because of the Comparisons that may be made to Other Aspects of the Game.

Bracers of Armor are Priced as they are in the Book being Why they are Priced Correctly is not a Sound Logical Argument unless you Assume that the Book is Always Correct.

If you consider the Bracers part of an outfit of regular clothing, then for the purposes of the Magic Vestment spell, they provide no armor bonus. That's what the Magic Vestment spell says to do with an outfit of regular clothing.

So while your 'outfit of regular clothing', including the Bracers, grants an armor bonus of, say, +6, the Magic Vestment spell applies a +3 (say) enhancement bonus to "no armor bonus", because the spell text defines the armor bonus of an outfit of regular clothing as "no armor bonus".

Because you're applying the enhancement bonus to a different armor bonus (or rather, 'no armor bonus'), you end up with your 'outfit of regular clothing' providing two armor bonuses - the original +6, and the enhanced 'no armor bonus' granting a total of +3. Two armor bonuses don't stack, and you're left with your original +6 from the Bracers.

Which is the same result you'd get by wearing Bracers and casting Magic Vestment on your clothes without trying to finesse things by claiming the Wondrous Item is just part of your clothes.

-Hyp.

The Spell treats the Clothing as being Armor with no Armor Bonus and gives that Clothing an Enhancement Bonus. The Bracers are part of this Clothing and give an Armor Bonus. The Armor Bonus from the Bracers Stack with the Enhancement Bonus from the Spell. Bracers themselves could also be viewed as being Armor that Normally Provides no Armor Bonus with the Bracers of Armor being an Exception to that Rule. In this Case the Bracers would Qualify for the Spell directly. Either way the Spell should give its Bonus.

 

[Shin Okada]

he Spell treats the Clothing as being Armor with no Armor Bonus and gives that Clothing an Enhancement Bonus. The Bracers are part of this Clothing and give an Armor Bonus. The Armor Bonus from the Bracers Stack with the Enhancement Bonus from the Spell. Bracers themselves could also be viewed as being Armor that Normally Provides no Armor Bonus with the Bracers of Armor being an Exception to that Rule. In this Case the Bracers would Qualify for the Spell directly. Either way the Spell should give its Bonus.

If you make bracers which turns normal clothing into an actual armor with Armor bonus, this is an item largely different from existing Bracers of Armor. This is a new item and thus must be determined it's cost differently. As this is a valid target of Magic Vestment spell and maybe upgraded by adding enhancement bonus to AC as usual armor, if the DM allows it (If I were a DM, I don't allow it, though).

The most similar items are Robe of Archmagi or Robe of Arcane Might (MIC) minus special abilities. Both of the items are specific items and thus it is hard to reverse engineer how much does the AC bonus part costs. But I guess that armor bonus part maybe following the usual formula for Armor bonus, I mean, AC bonus squared x 1,000 gp. But your new item is better than those robes as it protects you from incorporeal attacks. This is a big difference. So the cost should be significantly increased.

 

[Slaved]

Why is Incorporeal Attack Protection considered to be a Significant Boost to the Power Level of an Item?