New FAQ 23/11/06 [Merged]

[sjmiller]

I suppose they still haven't clarified how a hydra makes AoO, have they?

Not as far as I could see. I even submitted the question to them at the same time I mentioned it here. No response on that.

 

[brehobit]

I am not exaggerating one bit. The fantastic gain from the monk's belt for any wisdom-spellcaster outweighs any downside. My cleric would shred his armor for that ruling, going out to buy bracers of armor if he did not already have UMD (in which case he would buy a wand of mage armor). It's absurdly powerful. It's an extremely bad FAQ answer and it makes for a terrible rule, house or RAW.

Yep,
Pretty powerful. Say level 16, you start with a Wis of 16 and have a +6 Wisdom item for a total wisdom bonus. All level bumps go to wisdom. You've got a Wisdom of 28 for a total bonus (with the belt) of +10. That's better than full-plate. The bonus counts against touch attacks but not when flat footed, while the plate is the other way around.

However, the non-belt cleric can use a magic shield which is at least a +3 better than the belt-monk (if you allow him to use a floating shield, which I would not), and probably +6ish. The belt-monk has a better move, but can't carry as much (no medium load). A STR drain might well cause the belt-monk to lose all of his AC if he's carrying much of anything.

I'd say its mighty powerful, but shield and full-plate is probably better. For a druid, wild armor is hands-down better IMO.

At level 20+ the belt may become better....

Mark

 

[boolean]

The bonus counts against touch attacks but not when flat footed, while the plate is the other way around.

The monk's bonus to AC applies while flat-footed.

 

[Infiniti2000]

I'd say its mighty powerful, but shield and full-plate is probably better. For a druid, wild armor is hands-down better IMO.

Wait a minute. Why can't you have (e.g.) bracers of armor and a ring of force shield?

 

[brehobit]

The monk's bonus to AC applies while flat-footed.

Ya know, I never knew that.

Seems very weird, but certainly cool!

 

[brehobit]

Wait a minute. Why can't you have (e.g.) bracers of armor and a ring of force shield?

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.

Force Shield: An iron band, this simple ring generates a shield-sized (and shield-shaped) wall of force that stays with the ring and can be wielded by the wearer as if it were a heavy shield (+2 AC). This special creation has no armor check penalty or arcane spell failure chance since it is weightless and encumbrance-free. It can be activated and deactivated at will as a free action.

I'd say it counts as a shield and a monk can't use it. Something like a shield spell would work just fine though....

Mark

 

[Jhulae]

I am not exaggerating one bit. The fantastic gain from the monk's belt for any wisdom-spellcaster outweighs any downside. My cleric would shred his armor for that ruling, going out to buy bracers of armor if he did not already have UMD (in which case he would buy a wand of mage armor). It's absurdly powerful. It's an extremely bad FAQ answer and it makes for a terrible rule, house or RAW.

Um, I think you are. As others have said, the character has to stay at a light load.

Clerics also have to give up their shield.

Lets take a 12th level Cleric. Assuming you got a set of bracers +8, had a dex of 14 (dex isn't really needed for clerics) and a wis of 22, that's AC 26. Now, the same cleric has a normal suit of platemail, a large shield, and two Magic Vestments. That's AC 27 for 12 hours, spending NO gold at all on magical equipment.

Not to mention that the cleric can have a +1 suit of plate or a +1 shield, both having extra benefits (like fortification or whatnot), and boost them up to +3 each with MV (with 12th level as in my comparison), which not only has the benefit now of higher AC, but also some other goodies.

Taking lower Bracers of Armor (or the Wand) just makes the disparity worse. I *really* fail to see how this is game breaking or absurdly powerful.

 

[airwalkrr]

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.

Druids will definitely be clamoring for a monk's belt more often, especially those that do not rely heavily on wild shape. However, there is no substitute for one monk level, which will apply whether or not you are in wild shape or not.

 

[glass]

The metamagic rod FAQ is the most irritating. Either these rod work like Hypersmurf explained, or otherwise they should work really "on the fly" for everyone, and should not increase Sorcerer's casting time.

Yep, that one is particularly bad. As you point out, it makes no sense in itself, and as Hyp points out it doesn't match the DMG either.

But then, this is the FAQ we are talking about!


glass.

 

[KarinsDad]

The metamagic rod FAQ is the most irritating. Either these rod work like Hypersmurf explained, or otherwise they should work really "on the fly" for everyone, and should not increase Sorcerer's casting time.

This is funny.

If it had stated that it did not increase the Sorcerer's time, everyone would be yelling that the FAQ was changing the rules again.

A sorcerer still must take a full-round action when using a metamagic rod, just as if using a metamagic feat he possesses.

The FAQ is consistent here. It states that it is on the fly for everyone and it takes into account this sentence.


As for Hyp's other interpretation, I can understand where he got it from. Hyp is very particular with language, hence, "use-activated" should mean the normal time metamagic is prepared for casters who prepare spells.

Having said that, I think the designer intent all along is for metamagic rods to be used spontaneously by all casters:

All the rods described here are use-activated (but casting spells in a threatened area still draws an attack of opportunity).

The word "casting" in this sentence has to be referring to the "use-activated". Otherwise, this sentence would not be here, it would be next to the one where it discusses Sorcerers casting spontaneously since Wizards would not be using the Rod while casting, they would be using the rod while preparing spells.

Hence, I think Hyp's interpretation is not correct based on designer intent. Context is sometimes as important as individual words when determining interpretation.


In this regard, I think the FAQ got this one correct based on original designer intent.


However, having said that, I also think that Wizards and Clerics should use metamagic rods during preparation. Using them spontaneously is too potent of an ability. IMO.