Giving Clothes a Magical Armour Bonus...Is it wrong?

[dcollins]

Reiterating from the previous thread -- it's not definitely allowed under the core rules. Clothes are not armor, and are not given as an option in the DMG magic armor section. The fact that magic vestment works on clothing is a nonissue, since it's just a special case for that spell.

Edit: Just recollected the giant "dcollins says you can't have it" kreynolds helpfully posted near the top of the last thread. Hmm, maybe I didn't need to reiterate my position here after all...

 

[LokiDR]

If you want to reslot bracers of armor, I can't see a problem with it. Vestments and armor are different slots. But if you allow the full range of magic enhancements to be done on that shirt, you break one of basic concepts of the monk-they don't need armor.

By the by, there is a necklace in Savage Species that allows any weapon enchantment on N number of natural weapons. I don't agree with that either, but it was better than the insane amulet from sword and fist.

 

[Avatar of the North]

Magical clothing that provides ac bonuses, Sure i'd allow it otherwise ROBE OF THE ARCHMAGI couldn't exist.

Robe of the Archmagi
This normal-appearing garment can be white (a 01-45 result on d%, good alignment), gray (46-75, neither good nor evil alignment), or black (76-100, evil alignment). Its wearer, if an arcane spellcaster, gains the following powers:
+5 armor bonus to AC
Spell resistance 17.
+1 resistance bonus to all saving throws.
Ability to overcome the spell resistance of others as if the wearer had the feat Spell Penetration.
If a white robe is donned by an evil character, the character immediately gains three negative levels. The reverse is true with respect to a black robe donned by a good character. An evil or good character who puts on a gray robe, or a neutral character who dons either a white or black robe, gains two negative levels. While negative levels never result in lost levels, they remain as long as the garment is worn and cannot be overcome in any way (including restoration spells).
Caster Level: 14th; Prerequisites: Craft Wondrous Item, mage armor, bless, spell resistance, creator must be same alignment as robe; Market Price: 75,000 gp; Weight: 1 lb.

seems the rules already provide for cloths with 'armor bonuses' and even armor propertise

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

I'd only allow it for Hawaiian T-Shirts.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I'd only allow it for Hawaiian T-Shirts.

Heh. But remember, a +5 Hawaiian Shirt stacks with +3 Crystal Plate and a +5 blessed iron cap...

Asidonhopo hits! Asidonhopo misses. Asidonhopo hits!

You die...

-Hyp.

 

[bret]

I would either handle it as an unslotted version of bracers of armor, with the normal doubled cost for unslotted items; or treat them as bracers of armor that filled up another slot, like cloak, robe, etc.

You do know that clothes are a slot, don't you?

Why double the cost when it is a slotted item?

 

[Artoomis]

You do know that clothes are a slot, don't you?

Why double the cost when it is a slotted item?

The slots are:

1 headband, hat, helmet, or phylactery
1 pair of eye lenses or goggles
1 cloak, cape, or mantle
1 amulet, brooch, medallion, necklace, periapt, or scarab
1 suit of armor
1 robe
1 vest, vestment, or shirt
1 pair of bracers or bracelets
1 pair of gloves or gauntlets
2 rings
1 belt
1 pair of boots

Notably, "clothes" are not on the list. Certain items of clothing are on the list, of course.

A shirt of armor would be like bracers of armor, and I would have no problem with that.

Armor enhancements (Fortification, light; Glamered; etc.) belong on ARMOR - clothes are not armor.

I don't know how much simpler it could be. Clothes are be considered armor for the "Magical Vestments" spell, but that's an exception for a specific spell.

Armor enhancements are avialable for armor. If ya want 'em, you gots to wear actual armor. End of story - simplicity itself.

Anything else is a House Rule.

P.S. - If you allow armor-type enhancements on clothes, what happens to clothes worn under actual armor? Could you double up on armor enhancements - and get many more enhancements much cheaper? Can you still wear slotted clothing items? Or does "clothing armor" take up two or more slots - "suit of armor" and "vest, vestment, or shirt."

It really upsets game balance if you allow clothes to be "armored." It takes away from thoise who wear actual armor by leveling the armor playing field between classes - that's not supposed to be that way.

 

[cptg1481]

If it please the court......


Rules....shmules.....magic clothes just adds to the flavor of the game for me and mine.

I'm not a big stickler for the rules anyway so "it's not allowed by the rules" is not much of an argument.

I say go for the clothes man if that's what you want....rules be $%&&%!

 

[MerakSpielman]

I don't know how much simpler it could be. Clothes are be considered armor for the "Magical Vestments" spell, but that's an exception for a specific spell.

Armor enhancements are avialable for armor. If ya want 'em, you gots to wear actual armor. End of story - simplicity itself.

Anything else is a House Rule.

So you can't think of ANY non-armor item that grants armor bonuses? Like Bracers of Armor (Wonderous Item), or a Robe of the Archmagi (+5 armor bonus, also a wondrous item)?

These items are not "House Rules." They are core rulebook prescidents.

P.S. - If you allow armor-type enhancements on clothes, what happens to clothes worn under actual armor? Could you double up on armor enhancements - and get many more enhancements much cheaper? Can you still wear slotted clothing items? Or does "clothing armor" take up two or more slots - "suit of armor" and "vest, vestment, or shirt."

This isn't covered explicitly in the rules, but I would say that if you wear a Robe of the Archmagi with a suit of Platemail of Fire Resistance then only one would be functional - either the one touching the skin of the wearer or the one on the outside layer. Clothing of Armor would take up the Armor slot of the character.(edit: the preceeding sentance WOULD be a house rule, clothing is technically an unslotted wondrous item, as others are pointing out. In which case, it cannot bear the special enchantmets of enchanted armor, like Glamoured and Slipperiness any more than Bracers can.)

It really upsets game balance if you allow clothes to be "armored." It takes away from thoise who wear actual armor by leveling the armor playing field between classes - that's not supposed to be that way.

How so? Most high-level wizards already have an amulet of natural armor +5, a Ring of Protection +5, and Bracers of Armor +5. Clothing of Armor wouldn't stack with the Bracers, and would cost about the same. So they get their +5 armor bonus from Clothing of Armor instead of from Bracers of Armor. So what?

 

[Garmorn]

P.S. - If you allow armor-type enhancements on clothes, what happens to clothes worn under actual armor? Could you double up on armor enhancements - and get many more enhancements much cheaper? Can you still wear slotted clothing items? Or does "clothing armor" take up two or more slots - "suit of armor" and "vest, vestment, or shirt."

It really upsets game balance if you allow clothes to be "armored." It takes away from thoise who wear actual armor by leveling the armor playing field between classes - that's not supposed to be that way.

Long ago in one of the treads on Eric's old board this came up. One of the designers said something along these lines: that armor bonus on clothes does not stack with and with the bonus on armor because they are the same bonus. Remember an enhacement to bonus improves the armor bonus. This is the same argument that comes up with braces of armor and regular armor, only the higher of the two are used.