Does Adamantine Body Help With Sunder?

[drnuncheon]

But, warforged can't wear armor, and the adamantine body feat says you are considered to be wearing heavy armor. Therefore, they can't take the feat at all.

Which feat are you talking about?

Armor Proficiency (heavy)?

The adamantine body feat, which is to say, the same feat I was talking about in the sentence before, with no indication that the subject was changing. I suppose you might want to avoid assumptions about basic English structure, but then you would also want to avoid the assumption that I was talking about game rules and not my pet stoat.

The point is that 'considered to be wearing heavy armor' and actual heavy armor as a piece of equipment are two different things. Heavy armor as equipment can be removed, for example. Thus, items which apply to one type (like the fact that heavy armor comes with gauntlets) cannot automatically be assumed to apply to the other.

If you really want to bust stuff up with adamantine fists, I suggest investing in a couple of adamantine battlefists. Or for that matter, since gauntlets are weapons and not armor, merely buy a set of adamantine gauntlets - warforged can use them just fine.

J

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Adamantine Body does not say you are considered to be wearing heavy armor.

It says you are considered to be wearing heavy armor for purposes of effects which depend on armor use - like, Spring Attack, or Monk movement, etc.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Keith Baker has made the point on a number of occasions that the feat "Adamantine Body" does NOT mean that you are wearing adamantine armour. It should have been called "Adamantine - Laced Body"... it reflects a heavier-duty design of warforged with more structural reinforcing and bits of adamantine in some structurally significant places.

It has never been supposed to be the equivalent of wearing full adamantine plate armour, nor has it ever been supposed to give the ability to bypass certain damage reduction.

Keith has certainly said this in the "ask keith baker" thread on the wizards' boards, he may have said it on ENworld too.

Cheers

 

[drnuncheon]

Adamantine Body does not say you are considered to be wearing heavy armor.

It says you are considered to be wearing heavy armor for purposes of effects which depend on armor use - like, Spring Attack, or Monk movement, etc.

Well, actually, it doesn't, which is why there's confusion. The exact sentence is "However, your base land speed is reduced to 20 feet, and you are considered to be wearing heavy armor." Full stop, no qualifications.

Of note, though, it specifically does not say "you are considered to be wearing adamantine heavy armor", so even an overly literal reading doesn't support the original theory.

J

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Well, actually, it doesn't, which is why there's confusion. The exact sentence is "However, your base land speed is reduced to 20 feet, and you are considered to be wearing heavy armor." Full stop, no qualifications.

Noted. Thanks for the rules quote.

I guess I've seen it clarified by Hellcow himself so many times as " ... for purposes of abilities that depend on armor," I've forgotten it didn't really say that.

Do you have your book with you? If you do, could you post the part in the rules regarding the supposed "Armor Check Penalty?"

I'm almost absolutely certain you'll see that it says, "You take a -8 penalty to the following skills: Balance, Climb, etc."

It will not say, "You have an Armor Check Penalty of -8."

This means that the Mithral Fluidity feat incorrectly references an Armor Check Penalty.

Of note, though, it specifically does not say "you are considered to be wearing adamantine heavy armor", so even an overly literal reading doesn't support the original theory.

Heh heh. Good point.

 

[drnuncheon]

Do you have your book with you? If you do, could you post the part in the rules regarding the supposed "Armor Check Penalty?"

Let's see. In the warforged racial description, there's no skill penalty, but the spell failure chance is "similar to the penalty for wearing light armor". There's no "considered to be wearing" clause.

For Adamantine Body, it says "you have a -5 penalty on all skill checks that armor check penalties apply to" and then goes on to list them. Mithral Body has the same wording, and Mithral Fluidity does indeed incorrectly call it an 'armor check penalty'. Interestingly, it specifically lists them but does not include the "all skill checks that armor check penalties apply to" language, which will no doubt cause someone to maintain that any new skills which have an armor check penalty won't receive any benefit from Mithral Fluidity.

J

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

And there we go.

Mithral Fluidity is incorrectly worded, and Adamantine Body and Mithral Body do not impose Armor Check Penalties, so therefore, even if you're "non-proficient" with your own skin (which can't happen), you never take a penalty on your attacks.

 

[KarinsDad]

And there we go.

Mithral Fluidity is incorrectly worded, and Adamantine Body and Mithral Body do not impose Armor Check Penalties, so therefore, even if you're "non-proficient" with your own skin (which can't happen), you never take a penalty on your attacks.

Which just goes to show that at some point in time, the designers considered it an ACP. If you just read those feats in the book, it is literally an ACP (course, it is not in the errata).

The only thing about this "you must be proficient with your own skin" philosophy is that all characters who take the Mithral Body or Adamantine Body feat also get the Armor Proficiency (medium) or Armor Proficiency (heavy) feat respectively for free.

That's bothersome since no one feat should give another feat for free. That makes some feats supersets of other feats.

Other than that, I'm ok with it.

 

[Plane Sailing]

The only thing about this "you must be proficient with your own skin" philosophy is that all characters who take the Mithral Body or Adamantine Body feat also get the Armor Proficiency (medium) or Armor Proficiency (heavy) feat respectively for free.

That's bothersome since no one feat should give another feat for free. That makes some feats supersets of other feats.

If that were the case it wouldn't be an issue since they would be "feats" which could never be used - the warforged can never wear any armour, so armour proficiency feats are meaningless to them.

Cheers