Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="NorthSaber" data-source="post: 4403384" data-attributes="member: 69975">I'm saying that if we allow you to wear two sets of armor (like cloth and plate), the heavier armor worn should define whether you get the Dex/Int bonus to AC or not. It was just one example that illustrated how you can have articles of clothing underneath the metal plates. Magical cloth armor is usually described as being a robe or a jacket, so I don't think anyone can claim that you couldn't physically wear something like a jacket beneath your plate armor. And if you can enchant said jacket... You see where I'm going with this? Physical constraints, at least, cannot be the limiting factor here.I'm saying it's physically impossible to wield a shield and have a delicate spring-loaded system you described wrapped around the same arm, yes. I've seen pictures of various types of shields and I can't say that I'm convinced that most types of bracers/wristbands/bracelets would exclude the efficient use of a shield. This is true. The only example in the rules that would support my view is flimsy too. Bad, rules, bad. In this example (wearing a cloth jacket beneath plate armor), there would be no benefits anyway. In other cases, like wearing magical bracers and a shield, I disagree, and still hold that page 224 is only referring to magical benefits. I don't think either one of us will change our minds concerning this essential point. To sum up my arguments, I don't think there is any universal physical, in-game-logical reason against wearing different items in the same "item slot", like a cloth jacket underneath plate armor, or shield and bracer, and I think the item slot rule only refers to magical benefits. Sometimes the physical constraint is there, like in the example of the spring-loaded wrist mechanism and shield, or three sets of plate armor on top of one another, for instance.If I have understood correctly, you tie the item slot limitation to mundane benefits as well, and knock down my examples where there is no logical reason for the equipment not to stack, aside from game mechanics. If one is to place game mechanics and the economics of resources ahead of in-game logic and common sense, as 4e tends to do in many places, I believe you may be right. Won't change the way I play the game and interpret the rules, though, and many people read page 224 the same way I do - not that that is any proof either way.</blockquote>

Verification