Cloak of Mage Armor

[akbearfoot]

Seems like any attempt to make an item that grants a permanent bonus to armor class for cheaper than the standard price is pure cheeze. This also applies if said bonus is 'effectively' permanent and will apply to more or less every combat your character gets into, without costing any action DURING said combats.

Mage armor lasts practically forever in terms of game time....Look, a dungeon....I cast mage armor caster level 1 and it will probably last until we are ready to leave and rest for the day...unless it's one of those Tomb of horror things where you are forced to take 20 searching every 5 foot square or face a no-save TPK. If I can cast mage armor 3 times in a day then that is every encounter you're probably going to face in a day, even if they are broken up at different times.

 

[Folly]

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

Sorry, poor example. Lets use the Ring of Protection instead, since it also costs 8000 for a +2.

 

[gabriel_z]

"You cannot extend "True Strike" to be contiuous since it has no duration that is measure in rounds/minutes..." -gabriel_z
True strike has a duration, so there is no reason it couldn't be made continuous. The catch here is that the duration ends once the target makes an attack.

No! You are interpreting it wrong!

Your next single attack roll (if it is made before the end of the next round) gains a +20 insight bonus

"True Strike" affects you next attack roll, with a ristriction of one round.

 

[gabriel_z]

Let us remember that any item with a magical effect can be dispelled with Dispel Magic. Now if you are saying that the Cloak casts the spell then you would be right it would be easily dispelled, however in the following round the wearer could then recast the Mage Armor effect. In the case of the Ghost Touch armor this is not the case. The Ghost Touch armor would be shut down for a number of rounds specifically detailed under Dispel Magic. The only way this would fall true is if the caster of Dispel Magic specifically targetted the cloak instead of the spell it is casting.

And though I have never disagree with you on the math of what the DMG says on creating the cloak. I asked again: Do you think the item is equivalent to others in the DMG?

If so this applies:

I have some ocean front property in Arizona, and if you buy now I will throw in the Golden Gate Bridge for free.

4. My intention is to make the "cloak of mage armor" with caster level 1 so it will only cost 2000gp whereas bracers of armor are caster level 7 which is more difficult to dispell. Making the cloak with caster level 7 will cost 14000gp according to the table.

Yes, they have the same effect and almost the same price! (and if SRD fixes the CL for the Bracers of Armor to CL8, they will be EXACTLY the same)

What you can so as a DM is to restrict the Caster Level for AC bonus to CL7 or CL8 which will multiply the cost of the cloak by 7 or 8 respectively.

 

[Folly]

No! You are interpreting it wrong!

"True Strike" affects you next attack roll, with a ristriction of one round.

Your right, but that doesn't change the cost of the item or the ability to activate it as a free action. So while you cannot have it up for unlimited time, you can simple activate it before every swing.

 

[John Q. Mayhem]

So you make repeated Ad Hominems?

Ad hominems do not work that way, Slaved.

 

[Nifft]

Sorry, poor example. Lets use the Ring of Protection instead, since it also costs 8000 for a +2.

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

 

[Folly]

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

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. I do not think it is much over priced since of the 4000 to 8000 range I mentioned earlier, I believe it should be closer to the 8000 side of things.

The 4000 and 8000 number come from using the equation for armor and deflection as the lower and upper bounds. There is something to be said for the ability to get the bonus via mundane means (same reason armor is cheaper than other AC bonuses).

 

[VanRichten]

What you can so as a DM is to restrict the Caster Level for AC bonus to CL7 or CL8 which will multiply the cost of the cloak by 7 or 8 respectively.

I would put it at CL 8 which would put the cost of the cloak at 24,000 for the +4 Armor bonus making it very balanced. The cost being based +50% because the item in question is not normally associated with an armor bonus.

Beyond that there are only two ideas I can see for the Shield bonus to avoid a powergaming/cheeze factor.

Option 1: Remove the Immunity to Magic Missles, make CL 8, and Increase the cost of the item to a total of 60,000gp. This includes the armor bonus, plus the cost of a Shield spell at CL 8 for 16,000 x 2.25 (50% increase for non-standerd effect of a cloak and 75% for adding the second effect). Mage Armor Effect 24,000gp + Shield Effect 36,000gp.

Option 2: Make the shield effect usable a maxium of 3x/day, leave the immunity to magic missles, and still keep the effect to CL 8. Take the cost of the shield effect x 2.25 then determine based on number of times per day.

 

[Slaved]

Ad hominems do not work that way, Slaved.

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.