Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8245460" data-attributes="member: 6801228">It is also a feature of rangers, paladins, clerics, druids, Artificers, and Barbarians. You might as well say that an item that let you attack for 1d10 damage with reach requires attunement because martial weapon proficiency is a feature of fighters. Using shields isn't something that is unique to one or two classes, it is one of the most common profiencies, and having that proficiency qualifies you for a free +2 AC with no attunement by getting a +2 shield? But having no armor, no shields, ect means that your +2 AC needs to require attunement?There are 3 classes in the game who are not natively proficient in some armor. Monk, Sorcerer and Wizard. And again, we are saying that the +2 AC only requires a attunement when it is being used by a Monk, Sorcerer, or Wizard. Everyone else can use +2 AC on their armor, for free, with no attunement. And looking at the Frost Brand, it could be any sword, so it could be used by a strength dumping sorcerer, it just needs to be a shortsword. But, what actually makes it qualify for attunement? It is likely the Resistance to Fire damage, the bonus damage could be it, but the Dragontooth Dagger does a +1d6 and it doesn't require attunement, and it is a +1 weapon. And the Frost Brand has two other ribbon abilities that could be useful. That is a lot of power, makes sense that it ends up requiring attunement. And to your point that the fighter isn't going to want the Bracers, you are right. Because again, any class that can use armor would be stupid to take them. This is one of the things that tells me that the attunement is out of place, because if I removed every requirement from this item... The only classes who would use them are still the Barbarian, Monk, Sorcerer and Wizard. No one else would ever use them. And Barbarians only if their unarmored defense is within 1 point of Half-Plate. Or Breastplate if the game is heavy into sneaking. And if they can't get magical armor.So, the same classes would try to get them for the same reasons. That leaves the question, is +2 AC worth attunement on its own? And +2 shields and +2 Armor say no. By itself +2 AC does not require attunement. So, then, is there some reason that Monks, Wizards and Sorcerers should be denied +2 AC? I can't think of any.</blockquote>

Verification