Bracers of Armor vs. Incorporeal Attacks


Rules Questions


In my games I've always interpreted that the armor bonus from Bracers of Armor count vs. incorporeal, but in a campaign where we've been alternating DM's we can't come to a consensus on whether this is the case or not.
The Item Description says; "They surround the wearer with an invisible but tangible field of FORCE,...". Also mage armor is a requirement for their creation.
Force effects, as well as mage armor protect against such. Besides such rules, I've always seen it as one of the up sides TO B.o.A. that they worked that way.

Now because of the part of the text that says; "Alternatively, bracers of armor can be enchanted with armor special abilities.", one of the other DM's is saying that letting them have the equivalent of ghost touch is too powerful.
Any thoughts? Or better yet official rules that I may have missed?


You are correct. The other GM may not like it, but what's his rationale, rules-wise?

Universal Monster Rules wrote:


An incorporeal creature’s attacks pass through (ignore) natural armor, armor, and shields, although deflection bonuses and force effects (such as mage armor) work normally against it.

As you pointed out, the bracers of armor create a force effect. So what is the problem?

Sovereign Court

bracers of armor are force effects, incorporeal creatures are effected by force effects.

Quote:
Incorporeal (Ex) An incorporeal creature has no physical body. It can be harmed only by other incorporeal creatures, magic weapons or creatures that strike as magic weapons, and spells, spell-like abilities, or supernatural abilities. It is immune to all nonmagical attack forms. Even when hit by spells or magic weapons, it takes only half damage from a corporeal source (except for channel energy). Although it is not a magical attack, holy water can affect incorporeal undead. Corporeal spells and effects that do not cause damage only have a 50% chance of affecting an incorporeal creature. Force spells and effects, such as from a magic missile, affect an incorporeal creature normally
Quote:
These items appear to be wrist or arm guards. They surround the wearer with an invisible but tangible field of force, granting him an armor bonus of +1 to +8, just as though he were wearing armor. Both bracers must be worn for the magic to be effective.

To your GM who doesn't like it, perhaps you should point out how stupidly overpriced bracers of armor are. You spent 16,000gp for a first level spell. You could have purchased 20 wands of mage armor instead, and still had 1,000 gold left over.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The one I listed is the one that made sense to me. His other rationals included: It counts as regular armor so its not ghost touch; and my personal favorite, which always seems to come up when dealing with newer DM's, It's not explicitly stated in the description that it provides that protection...
That one actually made me do the most horrible thing I could think of in relation to game, I told him if he didn't want to think for himself to go play W.o.W. on tabletop, aka 4th ed.


allyncoon wrote:
That one actually made me do the most horrible thing I could think of in relation to game, I told him if he didn't want to think for himself to go play W.o.W. on tabletop, aka 4th ed.

He played with fire... and got BURNED!


Yes you are right. Force is force no matter the source. The "it doesn't say it does that" argument NEVER has any place in PF. Something follows general rules unless it says it does not.

This is something new DM's really really need to figure out quickly. Unless something says specifically that it does not follow the general rule then it does, always.

It would take up way to much space if every little thing had to state that it follows the general rules.


Stome wrote:
Force is force no matter the source.

Not sure what to say about this...


How about:

A horse is a horse, of course, of course.


Azaelas Fayth wrote:
Stome wrote:
Force is force no matter the source.
Not sure what to say about this...

I'm tattooing it to my forehead. It's that obvious. Arr.


I was meaning the Rhyming of it. I think Forseti got what I was meaning.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Stome wrote:

Yes you are right. Force is force no matter the source. The "it doesn't say it does that" argument NEVER has any place in PF. Something follows general rules unless it says it does not.

This is something new DM's really really need to figure out quickly. Unless something says specifically that it does not follow the general rule then it does, always.

It would take up way to much space if every little thing had to state that it follows the general rules.

But there's nothing in the text for the magic item that gives it a force effect. Even if mage armor is used to make the item, it doesn't give a mage armor effect.


Tangible Field of Force isn't a Force Effect?


Side RP question: Mind you with my group this degenerated into a much lower brow discussion, but; would bracers of armor keep you dry in the rain?


That depends on your GM and You. Keeping Dry really has no effect besides a few things.

My Characters it would depend on the Personality. My Orphan Monk? Probably not. My Noble Born Sorceress? Most assuredly so.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Bracers of armor, like mage armor, creates an around-the-body force effect that keeps out incorporeal creatures, rain and... air.

Mage armor: 1 hour/level without air.
Bracers of armor: permanent no-air effect
It does not specifically state that it does not keep out air.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Azaelas Fayth wrote:
Tangible Field of Force isn't a Force Effect?

Just relooked at the description... you're right. One thing you can't do in Pathfinder that you could in 3.5 though, wear +1 bracers of fortification and stack them with magic armor. The armor bonus wouldn't stack, but you'd get the fortification though.


No you wouldn't. It states you can't get either if they have less than your Armour.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Azaelas Fayth wrote:
No you wouldn't. It states you can't get either if they have less than your Armour.

I was referring to what people did in 3.5 that you can't do in Pathfinder. It was a common combo in Living Arcanis.


Oh now I get it. Sorry.


Even if you're right, that is an abusive way to stage an argument. That kind of divisiveness is only likely to escalate the emotions inherent to disagreements, and that is not conducive to fun.

Thebethia: Bracers of armor are priced just like any other armor enhancement bonus. If you enchant a suit of masterwork scale mail to become +1, it costs 1,000 gold. If you purchase a Bracers of Armor +1, they cost 1,000 gold. Sure, the Bracers may not have a total AC bonus as high as the enchanted scale mail -- but that's a consequence of you playing a character that wants to avoid armor check penalties, or maximum Dexterity bonus, or whatever urged you to pick the bracers. That's not an effective argument that the bracers are overly expensive, and it is not a compelling argument that the bracers should be considered a force effect based on their price.

Ultimately, I'm more convinced by the evidence that Bracers of Armor are intended to act as force effects and operate against incorporeal sources, but I have sympathy for those that disagree and wouldn't dare to suggest that they must not feel like thinking by disagreeing with me.


Troubleshooter wrote:
Ultimately, I'm more convinced by the evidence that Bracers of Armor are intended to act as force effects and operate against incorporeal sources, but I have sympathy for those that disagree and wouldn't dare to suggest that they must not feel like thinking by disagreeing with me.

+1 to that.


It had nothing to do him disagreeing with me, If I hadn't thought his point about the bonus lvl of ghost touch was valid I wouldn't have asked the question. I just get irritable when people don't seem to want to do their own research, or make judgement calls, when running a game. I'd already had to show him in the books where it said force works against incorporeal, for some reason he was under the impression that mage armor worked that way as part of the spell not because it was a force effect.

As a further example, since I was researching force, I decided to see if their where any other changes to force since 3.5 that I hadn't read up on yet, and sure enough, I seemed to remember a rule that allowed force to bypass object hardness, but I found nothing to that effect in the pathfinder rules.

I could have missed it, if i was even remembering it right to begin with, but as of then magic missile is no longer the ultimate in improvised lock picks in my games.

The way it was taught to me was: as a player you only really needed the golden rule and your character sheet; but the 3 R's {reading, research and (house)rules} are part of being a DM, and with a game like this they always will be.


Here you go definitive proof in black and white:

CRB p179 Touch attacks wrote:
Incorporeal touch attacks do not ignore armor bonuses granted by force effects, such as mage armor and bracers of armor.

There you go. :)

- Gauss

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Bracers of Armor vs. Incorporeal Attacks All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.