Cool next week a dragon's hoard.
I hope this book will have some cool magical gems and semi-precious stones.
Yes I agree with you on the brawling armor enchantment.
|
...does anyone else think that the brawling enchantment is a kick squarely in the pants of monks? It's not even an enhancement bonus, so it stacks with amulets of mighty fists...
+7 Brawling Bracers of Armor. Must-have equipment now for every 20th level Monk. It essentially gives them a +20 BAB with Flurry of Blows.
So many red dragons...
Could you even put Brawler on bracers of armor? The enhancement says light armor only. I suppose BoA are fairly light, but I'm guessing they meant the armor classification.
...Delving is going to be fun :D
Right now, I'm in Table-Overload, so can't really say much else.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for nipping that one in the bud before it became a 1000 post thread on the issue :)
|
...does anyone else think that the brawling enchantment is a kick squarely in the pants of monks? It's not even an enhancement bonus, so it stacks with amulets of mighty fists...+7 Brawling Bracers of Armor. Must-have equipment now for every 20th level Monk. It essentially gives them a +20 BAB with Flurry of Blows.
Bracers of armor do not count as light armor I am afraid.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Yeah, so not so much. I was right the first time. It's a kick in the pants. :P
Is there any (official) feat or class archetype granting a Monk to wear armor and keep her AC bonus?
Anyway, I hope among armor abilities is one that makes them like Spiderman's black costume.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe it might be fore people who use light armor and unarmed strikes.
Yea, I like the brawling enchantment. Not everything that involves unarmed strikes needs to be for monks, and this will give ninjas who want to use unarmed strikes a nice boost.
Anyway, I'm getting more and more excited about this book. The charts look very useful, and the format makes things easy to read.
creeping, energy resistance greater and determination look actually somewhat good.
no armor check penalty for stealth, -30 all energy types, auto breath of life spell.
creeping, energy resistance greater and determination look actually somewhat good.
no armor check penalty for stealth, -30 all energy types, auto breath of life spell.
"Greater energy resistance" only covers one energy type. Getting multiple copies of it to cover all four energy types would be VERY expensive. ;)
Just noticed the "Craft" thing about worked and unworked gems. Now, that kind of little details is what makes my eyes shine more. Like gems.
But isn't it a waste of space to repeat the value for each gem when they're all the same in each category?
Determination is actually an APG armor property.
And I agree, the ability to upgrade gems is a very nice touch!
"Greater energy resistance" only covers one energy type. Getting multiple copies of it to cover all four energy types would be VERY expensive. ;)creeping, energy resistance greater and determination look actually somewhat good.
no armor check penalty for stealth, -30 all energy types, auto breath of life spell.
yep, just saw that. Here's to hoping they make a Ring of universal greater energy resistance -30 to ALL 5 types. Like MiC did.
SO far, this book looks AMAZING!!!!! Going to pick one up as soon as my LGS has it.
This blog post definitely amused me.
This book is one of the reason I got the Roleplaying Game subscription.
Can hardly wait to get my hands on it.
Strike 3!
Table 7-50
Grade 1
09-14 Alabaster
14-20 Azurite
Grade 2
87-92 Spinel, red or green
94-100 Zircon
I stopped before reading through the gem listing for errors since I do not get paid to...yet. My earlier offer to help search for errors in unreleased books still stands though. As a bonus, I am willing to work for a modestly low wage.
Love the Henry V quote. :)
This book is pretty much a must have. I think it's inevitable though to have items and properties that are a bit much on the power side... For example I don't quite get that much talked brawling-property. Why is it +2 attack and damage for a 1000 gp (if first enchantment), when enchanting a weapon gets +1 for 2000 gp? Must be because you effectively need improved unarmed strike feat to make the best use of it, but still... Giving a weapon property to armor strikes me a bit funny.
But as I said, book this size is bound to have something I don't like, I'm pretty sure I'll love most of it! =)
Thanks for nipping that one in the bud before it became a 1000 post thread on the issue :)
Just wait until the monk lovers notice this and start posting how a fighter specialized in unarmed combat now will outdamage the monk.
I like the Brawling ability. It would be cool building a Rogue, fighter, barbarian or bard that fights unarmed. I can see myself building a Free Hand Fighter or Tactician with high dex specialized in unarmed combat.
Bracers of armor do not count as light armor I am afraid.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Whyfore make so many a monk a sad panda?
Just out of interest: can a monk wear a +1 brawling t-shirt without violating the no-armor clause? Assuming that he doesn't use armor bracers or anything that would "turn off" the t-shirt.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Just out of interest: can a monk wear a +1 brawling t-shirt without violating the no-armor clause? Assuming that he doesn't use armor bracers or anything that would "turn off" the t-shirt.
I think you can only put armor enhancement bonuses and armor special abilities on items that are actually... armor. I guess a +1 brawling t-shirt is just as off-limits as, say a +1 light fortification chandelier.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just out of interest: can a monk wear a +1 brawling t-shirt without violating the no-armor clause? Assuming that he doesn't use armor bracers or anything that would "turn off" the t-shirt.I think you can only put armor enhancement bonuses and armor special abilities on items that are actually... armor. I guess a +1 brawling t-shirt is just as off-limits as, say a +1 light fortification chandelier.
Which is ultimately no more ridiculous that placing the enhancement on a suit of padded armor, which is nothing more than a quilt-turned-coveralls.
I don't take issue because of monks or fighters, I take issue with the logic that such rulings are derived from. If one of my players wanted to wear a +1 tunic, well, okay! That PC just paid 1000 gold for a +1 armor bonus to AC.
Making the distinction between clothing and armor in this case is splitting one hair too many.
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Just out of interest: can a monk wear a +1 brawling t-shirt without violating the no-armor clause? Assuming that he doesn't use armor bracers or anything that would "turn off" the t-shirt.I think you can only put armor enhancement bonuses and armor special abilities on items that are actually... armor. I guess a +1 brawling t-shirt is just as off-limits as, say a +1 light fortification chandelier.Which is ultimately no more ridiculous that placing the enhancement on a suit of padded armor, which is nothing more than a quilt-turned-coveralls.
I don't take issue because of monks or fighters, I take issue with the logic that such rulings are derived from. If one of my players wanted to wear a +1 tunic, well, okay! That PC just paid 1000 gold for a +1 armor bonus to AC.
Making the distinction between clothing and armor in this case is splitting one hair too many.
The problem then is:
- is the t-shirt "light armor" for the purpose of the brawling enchantment- is the t-shirt "not armor" for the purpose of flurrying, monk AC and fast movement
I'm not speaking on the brawling ability, merely the distinction between clothing and armor.
However, I will humor the question and say that while I would make a ruling that armor enhancements can be applied to normal clothing, that would not make clothing "armor" in the sense that wearing it would disqualify you from abilities that prohibit armor.
Maybe this gets the monk a better AC at lower levels...? Woohoo. Nobody at my table plays monks, and while I'm not a proponent of making all classes equal in combat, I hear very little defense in the "monks are underpowered" department.
No snark directed at anyone. It's a pet peeve, and I'm aware that at my table I run the rules how I see fit.
|
|
It's probably easier, from the perspective of rules coherence, to institute a houserule that does allow bracers of armor to count as light armor for the purposes of enchantments that only work on certain armor types. You get almost the same result, and you have to work a lot less hard on drawing a distinction between clothing and armor.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of the things that I miss about older editions (and believe me I have no illusions on the clunky nature of older editions and the improvements brought on through PF) is that treasure in the table top game has come to the realm of Diablo III's Auction House.
Different, weird, and creative treasure that you must balance is more fun to me than "No, I don't want a sword +1, +3 vs. undead. The statistical projection of my DPS is better if I sell it." Sure it's an exaggeration, but it describes what I'm talking about.
I support a variety of weird things!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just out of interest: can a monk wear a +1 brawling t-shirt without violating the no-armor clause? Assuming that he doesn't use armor bracers or anything that would "turn off" the t-shirt.I think you can only put armor enhancement bonuses and armor special abilities on items that are actually... armor. I guess a +1 brawling t-shirt is just as off-limits as, say a +1 light fortification chandelier.Which is ultimately no more ridiculous that placing the enhancement on a suit of padded armor, which is nothing more than a quilt-turned-coveralls.
I don't take issue because of monks or fighters, I take issue with the logic that such rulings are derived from. If one of my players wanted to wear a +1 tunic, well, okay! That PC just paid 1000 gold for a +1 armor bonus to AC.
Making the distinction between clothing and armor in this case is splitting one hair too many.
The problem then is:
- is the t-shirt "light armor" for the purpose of the brawling enchantment
- is the t-shirt "not armor" for the purpose of flurrying, monk AC and fast movement
New Light Armor
Cloth - 1gp - +0 AC - -0 ACP - 0% ASF - same speed - 1 lbsCloth Armor - Cloth armor counts as light armor for the purposes of spells, feats, special abilities, and armor enchantments. Any character can wear cloth armor without violating their class features, such as a monk. While cloth armor is listed as 1 gp, see equipment chapter for prices on different cloth armors (clothing).
This is what I use. I just imagine this was an entry in the armor table.
If it doesn't provide an armor bonus in and of itself, it's not armor in my book.
So I guess silken web armor or fetish armor from Arms and Armor isn't armor either? Even though they are listed as such....
What is "Arms and Armor"?
What is "Arms and Armor"?
What is "Arms and Armor"?
It's the stuff you craft with one of the feats on page 120 of the Core Rulebook, conveniently grouped into a single chapter in Ultimate Equipment.
What is "Arms and Armor"?It's the stuff you craft with one of the feats on page 120 of the Core Rulebook, conveniently grouped into a single chapter in Ultimate Equipment.
I don't think that was what he meant. :)
Indeed it seems to be an old third party book for D&D v.3.5, and as such irrelevant to my argument. In fact, some third party publishers of the time often had a less than firm grip on the rules.
OIC. :)
|
|
Love that random gem table, and that there are brief descriptions of each gem! :)
A question: is the 'clangorous' ability really usable every time you're hit, or is it supposed to be x/times per day? What if you don't receive any damage (for example, due to DR)... is such an attack also counted as a "hit"?
Yay! Onyx gems max out at 65gp! 3 HD+ skeletons/zombies now no longer possible!
Hurray for new rules!
...I thought this book wasn't going to have any new rules, and instead was just going to be an item book...?
I don't see where it says that those are the only possible values for those kinds of gems. You just won't get a more valuable onyx in a treasure pile that was randomly generated by a GM using that chart.
I don't see how it could be construed as anything other than minimum/maximum values. It's a simple fix though, simply errata Animate Dead and similar spells to say "[X]gp worth of [gemstones]."
Okay. They are minimum/maximum values. They are the minimum/maximum values for random onyx found in treasure hordes that are generated from a particular table. So what? Quote me the part where it says that those gems do not exist in any other values.
Quote me the part where it says that those gems do not exist in any other values.
I don't see how my failing to do so really supports your apparent claim that such gems do exist.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Quote me the part where it says that those gems do not exist in any other values.I don't see how my failing to do so really supports your apparent claim that such gems do exist.
You're the one complaining that it's a new rule that they don't exist, so you're the one who has to back up the claim that they don't any more.