Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Infiniti2000" data-source="post: 3207450" data-attributes="member: 31734">Why wouldn't it work with bracers of armor or a shield spell?  Those produce 'armor' and 'shield' bonuses, which as I said, stack with the bonus based on wisdom.  You seem to think they don't.  While I agree that the cost of an item need not always been within the guidelines, this one (under your interpretation) breaks away SO far from those guidelines as to make the pricing impossible, if not plain ridiculous.  I ask you again, please price an item with an open-ended AC bonus.  This futile exercise will (I hope) help you see my point more clearly. One could argue anything, true. So, how do you explain this?  Actually, let's continue with your example.  The bracers of armor +8 (which is what I presume you are suggesting), do not stack with the full plate.  Neither does the monk's belt (assume wisdom 26).monk's belt: +8 bonus to AC (based on wisdom), applies to touch and not lost when flat-footed, does not stack with full platebracers: +8 armor bonus to AC, does not apply to touch (except incorporeal) and not lost when flat-footed, does not stack with full plateAdditionally, the monk's belt gives you "unarmed damage of a 5th-level monk."  That has to be worth something, reducing the price of just the AC bonus.  Actually, the additional stunning fist should be worth something, too.Because you think the monk's belt is properly priced, surely you must think the bracers are WAY over priced.  After all, the bracers have the same limitation and offer LESS (a worse AC bonus IMO plus none of the extra abilities). So, if I create an item that doesn't stack with a very cheap source of an alternate bonus, that's okay?  Even if I never plan to use that very cheap source? Your argument is a straw man and you are still avoiding the point.</blockquote>

Verification