New FAQ 23/11/06 [Merged]

[Infiniti2000]

Well, #1 you can't (as far as I know) enchant the ring of force shield, so +2 is what you get.

#2, and this may just be me, but I'd not allow the ring to work with a monk's AC bonus.

I think it is just you, but I used "e.g." to show that I'm positive there are a LOT of other options to obtain armor/shield bonuses to AC, completely (nearly) negating your rebuttal.

In other words, your ruling changes the item from a +1 AC bonus (and a very good one at that, much better than armor/shield) to an OPEN-ENDED AC bonus.

It's ludicrous to even contemplate the pricing on an open-ended AC bonus, particularly one as powerful that affects touch AC and is not lost like dex/dodge bonuses. Stop trying to justify it for a cleric with respect to armor and shield for a second and just try to price the bonus.

 

[brehobit]

I think it is just you, but I used "e.g." to show that I'm positive there are a LOT of other options to obtain armor/shield bonuses to AC, completely (nearly) negating your rebuttal.

In other words, your ruling changes the item from a +1 AC bonus (and a very good one at that, much better than armor/shield) to an OPEN-ENDED AC bonus.

It's ludicrous to even contemplate the pricing on an open-ended AC bonus, particularly one as powerful that affects touch AC and is not lost like dex/dodge bonuses. Stop trying to justify it for a cleric with respect to armor and shield for a second and just try to price the bonus.

Yep, the bonus is large, but it comes with a pretty large restriction.

I think the real measure is if anyone who uses the rule as written (which I think the FAQ is supporting) has seen any kind of problem here. I haven't. I've never seen a non-monk character which uses a monk's belt. I've not ever heard stories of it. If there were a class that was a wisdom-based caster who had an arcane failure chance _then_ it would be broken really quickly. But there isn't one. A "battledancer belt" would be _clearly_ broken (adds CHR to AC with the same restriction) as every sorc in the world would have one.

So rather than look at the bonus, look at the question "is it broken _in play_ for the cost?" I claim the answer is no. The other options are generally better (full plate/shield).

Mark

 

[Nail]

I think the real measure is if anyone who uses the rule as written (which I think the FAQ is supporting) has seen any kind of problem here. I haven't. I've never seen a non-monk character which uses a monk's belt. I've not ever heard stories of it. ..

Well, that's about to change....

In the last party I played a Clr, all the way up to 21st level. I'm good at planning and optimizing, so even at low level I planned how my AC would progress, given standard wealth. It turned out that for my Clr, even putting all level bonuses into Wisdom (etc), the Monk's Belt would NOT get me the highest AC possible at each level. So I went a different route. Aside:

Spoiler

It turned out that played correctly (and within RAW), a PC's AC can easily out-distance the monster's ability to hit it, even with incorporeal attacks....but that's for another thread.

For our Druid, however, the options for AC are substantially different. I helped her plan out her AC progression, and we found the Monk's Belt would be best. The druid got one at about 10th level IIRC....and used it for the rest of her adventuring career. It was awesome. It gave her animal forms a reasobale AC, for one thing.

So there you have it. You've now heard (or read) of a non-monk player that used the Monk's Belt for the AC benefit.

 

[Corsair]

Regarding monk's belt and druids: My druid character is playing in a game where we do not use the item melding rules, because they came out mid-way through this campaign. Rather than change anything, we just decided to stay how we are for now.

My druid uses a monk's belt rather than wilding (or beastskin if you prefer) dragonhide plate, and we haven't had any balance issues. My AC as a dire bear is very good, but that is more because of my extended barkskin granting +5, and the +7 natural (-1 size) from the dire bear form which give me the big edge over the party paladin. If I didn't have the monk's belt, I would just have wilding or beastskin dragonhide plate armor.

 

[brehobit]

Well, that's about to change....


For our Druid, however, the options for AC are substantially different. I helped her plan out her AC progression, and we found the Monk's Belt would be best. The druid got one at about 10th level IIRC....and used it for the rest of her adventuring career. It was awesome. It gave her animal forms a reasobale AC, for one thing.

So there you have it. You've now heard (or read) of a non-monk player that used the Monk's Belt for the AC benefit.

Yep,
If you don't do the item merging, the monk's belt is great for a druid. But as that is now errata, it isn't so useful for a druid. Wild armor is the only way to go RAW.

So I've now seen one non-RAW use (assuming I understand the merging rules correctly...)

Mark

 

[mvincent]

we know that a wizard casting a spell with a metamagic rod must have applied the metamagic feat at preparation time

I've talked with a lot of people in person about this, and (absolutely) every one of them came to the opposite conclusion without mentioning any ambiguity about it in their mind. I personally saw how one could come to your conclusion, but I also very definitely came to the same conclusion as them. The other method seemed complicated and unintuitive. I would have been terribly surprised if the Sage had ruled that way.

Also, every official NPC spellcaster I have found that had a meta-magic rod in their possession has never listed a spell prepared with a meta-magic rod (example). Have you found any that were otherwise?

Can you admit the possibility that your perception may not be the norm in this case (and that the Sage's is)?

 

[mvincent]

Good God, it's absurdly powerful in every single case of a spellcaster with Wisdom as a spellcasting stat. It's patently ridiculous for that price.

I haven't seen it abused yet, but that is a subjective matter (and so can't really be debated conclusively). However, I stood up for your same interpretation on another board, and it was immediately refuted by dozens of people (no one sided with me).

In all honesty, I wouldn't have naturally come by the conclusion that I debated for, except it had been a living Greyhawk house rule (so that was the closest thing I had to an official weight in). Now, the Sage's answer makes more sense to me, and coincides with how the vast majority of players I've encountered are handling it.

 

[Mistwell]

No offense to those I have debated this issue with over the years, but I am SO FRIGGEN HAPPY about the metamagic rod answer in the FAQ. And no, not because it helps my wizard character (I have no character with such a rod). But because I hope this goes a long way to ending that debate finally, aside from the "FAQs mean nothing" crowd.

When an issue gets heatedly debated over and over again for years, it pleases me when WOTC finally takes a stand on it.

Now if only WOTC would errata the core rules to include the FAQ, all would be well with the world.

Well, that, and if they would finally end the Divine Metamagic abuse issue. That would be like a Christmas gift.

 

[Felix]

Now if only WOTC would errata the core rules to include the FAQ

Would you have them do that before or after they issue errata for the FAQ?

 

[Infiniti2000]

I haven't seen it abused yet, but that is a subjective matter (and so can't really be debated conclusively). However, I stood up for your same interpretation on another board, and it was immediately refuted by dozens of people (no one sided with me).

It's actually very simple to prove how broken it is. The problem people can't see it as a bonus. What is the cost of a +5 insight bonus to AC for a slotted wondrous item (assume appropriate affinity)? The guideline is Bonus squared × 2,500 gp, so that would be 62,500 gp. Now, this particular AC bonus stacks with all other types, so the insight equivalent is appropriate. However, the restriction on armor and encumbrance should reduce it. To what? Being extraordinarily generous, say half? How about +6? +8? +12? Wait a minute, you mean increasing the bonus doesn't increase the cost?! Now, just compare the moderate +5 to the cost of the monk's belt, which grants additional abilities. The calculations are absurd.