Cloak of Mage Armor

[Elethiomel]

I still think the Bracers of Armor are reasonably priced because any other item that provides an armor bonus and exists in the game provides a maximum dexterity bonus that puts a hard cap on how much AC you can get from the sum of your Armor Bonus and your Dexterity Bonus. Hence the Bracers of Armor are essentially a +0 armor that has an infinite Max Dex bonus and can be enchanted (with the exceptions that this +0 armor can be enchanted up to +8 using non-epic rules, and IIUC cannot be enchanted with special armor abilities).

 

[ardentmoth]

Oi Gevalt.

So you make repeated Ad Hominems?

I think he called you (or was it your argument?) silly a page or so ago. Other than that, there have been no Ad Hominem attacks. Repeated? No. Ad Hominem? Barely.

Rather, after having re-read this thread, I find that you are guilty of taking things, and yourself, WAY too seriously. The purpose of a game is what again? To have fun.

Go have fun.
----------
Back to the topic at hand, my opinion to the dungeon master is this:

Master your dungeon. If you feel that it would be okay to do, let it be so; if you cannot decide how to price it or craft it, make one, and let it be treasure. I don't think a player would have much of a problem with Phat Loot® instead of XP and GP loss .

 

[Tewligan]

After careful consideration, I have to side with Slaved on this one. His frequent use of exclamation points really convinces me. No one uses four of THOSE in a row unless he's sure of what he's saying!!!!

 

[ardentmoth]

Okay, alright, that's two of them, I stand corrected....after the fact.... hehe...

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

My Wizard's philosophy is that once you hit middling levels it does not matter whether you are AC 10 or AC 20. If Mirror Image or Blur or Displacement fail you, you are gonna get hit always.

Mage Armor? Who cares!

Bracers of Armor are priced correctly...for other characters or monsters.

Besides, they are really cheap when you take them of the arms of your fallen foes.

 

[MithrasRahl]

Slightly off topic question, but would you price an item that mimiced the Shield spell at the same price as +4 Bracers of Armor, or would it be slightly higher or lower?

 

[Nifft]

Slightly off topic question, but would you price an item that mimiced the Shield spell at the same price as +4 Bracers of Armor, or would it be slightly higher or lower?

Higher, of course.

Shield has a duration 1/60th that of mage armor. Also, a Ring of Force Shield is more expensive than Bracers of Armor +2.

Cheers, -- N

 

[VanRichten]

Probably 25%-50% more. Considering it has the following effects:

+4 Shield Bonus
Immune to Magic Missle
Works against Incorporeal Touch Attacks
No Armor Check penalty
No Spell Failure penalty
Virtually No Weight
Allows the wearer to use an item in both hands with no penalty due to use. (This is an
extrapolation on the fact of using a shield in the offhand gives the wearer penalty to
attack if it is a buckler, but does not allow a weapon at all if it is a small or large shield.)

 

[Folly]

The ring of force shield is definitively an overpriced item. I say this because compared to other magic items that provide AC bonuses that are not an armor bonus, it cost more. For example, an Amulet of Natural Armor +2 costs 8000 gold, while the Ring of Force Shield costs 8500. They both provide a bonus to AC, they both use an item slot (it can be argued that the ring uses two, but it is unclear). Further when compared against a +1 Mithral Buckler (2020 gp), the only difference is the ring can be activated and deactivated as a free action (a useless feature if it only uses the ring slot). Both provide a +2 shield bonus to AC, but the buckler has going for it: upgraded (either by more enhancement or other special properties), and does not take up a slot for any character that does not use their off-hand for attacking. The only class that would use this item would be a monk, and even then it would be purchased after all other defensive items. As far as what the ring should cost, it should be somewhere between 4000 and 8000.

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)

 

[VanRichten]

For example, an Amulet of Natural Armor +2 costs 8000 gold, while the Ring of Force Shield costs 8500. Folly

Amulet of Natural Armor does not work against Incorporeal Attacks and the Ring of Force Shield does.