MIC: Ironward Diamond....Overpowered?

[James McMurray]

It says "stacks with similar damage reduction from any other source" not "stacks with all other damage reduction." Looks like it's only meant to stack with DR of x/-, making it useful on adamntine armor or for barbarians (and a few other cases).

 

[KarinsDad]

Wait... the stackable DR isn't the limitation. The "This crystal can only be applied to heavy armor" is a limitation. "for the purposes of movement and other limitations" doesn't restrict it to the limitations of the armor itself; "of the armor" is a phrase you're adding.

It's pretty obvious that the phrase "for the purposes of movement and other limitations" is talking about limitations caused by the wearing of armor, not limitations caused by not wearing armor.

The limitation that a crystal can only be used in heavy armor is not a limitation of wearing heavy armor. It is can only be considered a limitation of "not wearing heavy armor" (or of wearing armor which is not heavy). But in reality, Mithral Full Plate is Heavy Armor. It just has some properties of Medium Armor "for the purposes of movement and other limitations".

A better way of saying it is that of "for the purposes of movement and other limitations (caused by wearing the specific type of armor)". Yes, I am adding this to the end of the sentence because that is implied by the sentence. One doesn't remove the limitation of spells per day when wearing Mithral Armor. One doesn't remove the limitation of total hit points when wearing Mithral Armor. The sentence only applies to limitations caused by the wearing of the armor, not any other limitations caused by anything else.

"This crystal can only be applied to heavy armor" is not a limitation when wearing heavy armor, it is an advantage when wearing heavy armor. It is a limitation when not wearing heavy armor, but one is wearing heavy armor when wearing Mithral Full Plate.

Heavy armors are treated as medium, and medium armors are treated as light, but light armors are still treated as light.

"Are treated as" does not mean "are".


If it is not a limitation caused by the wearing of the armor, it is not a limitation affected by that sentence.

 

[hong]

It's pretty obvious that the phrase "for the purposes of movement and other limitations" is talking about limitations caused by the wearing of armor, not limitations caused by not wearing armor.

D00d, stop it.

 

[Hypersmurf]

One doesn't remove the limitation of spells per day when wearing Mithral Armor.

No, indeed. You don't remove it; rather, you use the limitation of spells per day while wearing Medium armor, instead of the limitation of spells per day while wearing Heavy armor. Which happen to be identical.

One doesn't remove the limitation of total hit points when wearing Mithral Armor.

No, indeed. You don't remove it; rather, you use the limitation of total hit points while wearing Medium armor, instead of the limitation of total hit points while wearing Heavy armor. Which happen to be identical.

The sentence only applies to limitations caused by the wearing of the armor, not any other limitations caused by anything else.

I would say, rather, that the sentence only applies to limitations related to the category of the armor.

The limitation on which categories of armor a Greater Ironward Crystal can be applied to would be one such.

"This crystal can only be applied to heavy armor" is not a limitation when wearing heavy armor, it is an advantage when wearing heavy armor. It is a limitation when not wearing heavy armor, but one is wearing heavy armor when wearing Mithral Full Plate.

For the purpose of limitations, one is not wearing heavy armor. So if it's a limitation when not wearing heavy armor, that's what you're doing.

If it is not a limitation caused by the wearing of the armor, it is not a limitation affected by that sentence.

It's a limitation caused by wearing medium armor.

-Hyp.

 

[Deset Gled]

If you can afford it.
If you can afford it.

I would consider 8000gp to be affordable around levels 12-13, and a drop in the bucket above level 17.

It's WHAT? Impossible to steal? Why on earth would you think that?

Sorry, my mistake. Not impossible to steal. Just much harder to steal than an ioun stone.

It does not stack with another armor crystal, and the armor crystal is a new slot which can hold only one item.

...

You just need to wrap your mind around there now being a new couple of slots - the armor crystal slot, and the weapon crystal slot.

Admittedly, this is a big part of it. I'm not sold on it yet. On paper, the mechanic of creating a new slot that works on top of another slot does not seem like a good idea to me.

Edit: /

 

[KarinsDad]

It's a limitation caused by wearing medium armor.

But one is not wearing medium armor when wearing Mithral Full Plate.

One is wearing heavy armor "as if" it were a medium category. "as if" and "are" are two different things.

Mithral Full Plate looks like heavy. It sounds like heavy. Except for weight, it feels like heavy. It's AC (with also is not a limitation of wearing heavy) is like heavy.

Only limitations caused by wearing heavy armor are limitations that apply to heavy armor.


AC 8 applies to Full Plate. It does not apply to Medium Armors. Is this ALSO a limitation of medium armors? No. It is an advantage of Full Plate Armor, just like another advantage of full plate armor is that the greater iron ward diamond works with it.


A limitation in some other type of armor is not a limitation in heavy armor.


"John cannot legally vote for the President in the U.S. until he is 18.

John looks 16 and has the muscle reflexes "as if" he were 16 year olds.

If John is 18, he can still vote for President because although not voting at age 16 is a limitation of age 16, it is an advantage of age 18."

 

[hong]

But one is not wearing medium armor when wearing Mithral Full Plate.

Yes, one is.

 

[Cheiromancer]

This reminds me of the discussion about whether a monk's unarmed strikes meet the prerequisites for Improved Natural Attack!

Before we get into that, though; if someone has DR 3/- (adamantine armor, say) and has a crystal that grants 5/-, and takes 2 hp of damage from an arrow, is the reduction taken from the 3/- provided by the adamantine armor, or does it come from the crystal?

 

[hong]

This reminds me of the discussion about whether a monk's unarmed strikes meet the prerequisites for Improved Natural Attack!

Before we get into that, though; if someone has DR 3/- (adamantine armor, say) and has a crystal that grants 5/-, and takes 2 hp of damage from an arrow, is the reduction taken from the 3/- provided by the adamantine armor, or does it come from the crystal?

Actually, what the ironward diamond description says is "stacks with similar damage reduction granted by any other source". I would take "similar DR" to mean only DR X/-, like barbarian or adamantine DR.

 

[James McMurray]

Actually, what the ironward diamond description says is "stacks with similar damage reduction granted by any other source". I would take "similar DR" to mean only DR X/-, like barbarian DR. So adamantine DR wouldn't stack.

Adamantine armor DR is x/-.