|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
In both the original Campaign Setting, and the new Adventurer's Armory, mention is made of the Armored Kilt, and the rules are kind of muddled because of the 'wear alone' and 'wear with other armor' possibilities.
1) Because it can be worn as a separate suit of armor, it can be made as a masterwork armor and be enchanted. If, for example, a +1 armored kilt were added to a chain shirt, would it add +1 to the chain shirt's armor or +2 (+1 from the kilt, +1 from the enhancement)?
2) Would there be any benefit to making the kilt out of mithral (apart from it weighing half as much) when added to another suit of armor?
3) If a nonmagical armored kilt were to be made out of adamantine would it (as light adamantine armor) give +1 to AC and DR 1/adam if it were attached to a suit of armor?
It's entirely possible that I am overthinking this, and that the designer's didn't have these possibilities in mind when they developed the item.
Yeah, the Armored Kilt can complicate things at first glance, but it really works like any other armor.
1) I'd say it adds the +2. Unless of course you were adding it to an enchanted set of armor, in which case only the highest of the two enhancement bonuses would apply.
2) No. It would still make the armor count as one 'class' higher.
3) Sure. If a PC had to pay the extra cost for adamantine they deserve to get the benefits. Again, the exception being when added to a set of adamantine armor. The DR would not stack.
|
|
1a) I see no reason why it can't be made Masterwork. However, since it already has a +0 ACP, MW gives you no mechanical benefit.
1b) I see no reason why it couldn't be enchanted with normal armor bonuses. However, I do not believe the bonuses would stack, see 1c.
1c) The way Armor Kilts stack with suits of Armor, is a glaring hole in the RAW, IMHO. While both provide "armor" bonuses to your AC, they stack, but specifics on how they interact are not outlined. Furthermore, if they do fully stack, a +5 Kilt on a +5 Breastplate is superior to +5 Full Plate in every possible way, to an almost game-breaking proportion. While absent from the RAW, I can't imagine that the RAI would be for the Kilt's enhancement bonus to add to the Armor's enhancement bonus in such a way.
Since we are already into house rule territory, here is how I would rule it:
There are three bonuses that combine to provide a character's "Armor Bonus to AC":
- A "Base Armor" bonus granted by the Suit of Armor
- An "Accessory" bonus granted by an Armored Kilt or similar accessory released in the future
- An "Enchancement" bonus based on the magical enchantment on the armor OR accessory
2) Making an Armored Kilt out of Mithril would increase it's max. dex. allowance, though it wouldn't affect how an armored kilt increases the weight/type category of the armor.
3) Yes, an adamantine armored kilt would provide DR 1/-. Additionally, while I would generally not allow DR to stack (i.e. a Barbarian gets little benefit out of wearing adamantine armor) , I believe the properties of an armored kilt might provide an interesting interaction. If wearing both adamantine light armor, and an adamantine armored kilt, you would be considered as wearing medium adamantine armor, and perhaps get DR 2/-. They aren't strictly stacking persee, rather interacting in such a way the the net effect is the same.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Adding an armored kilt to an existing set of armor has the effect of creating a new type of armor, just as studded leather is leather with studs, chainmail is a chain shirt plus leg and arm coverings, and half-plate is chainmail plus plates. Once you add it to armor, don't think of it as a separate piece that you can add unique properties to, just consider the new armor as a whole. Just as you wouldn't say "I want to add magic to the studs of my studded leather armor" or "I want the plate parts of my half-plate to be adamantine" or even "I want to add enhancement bonuses just to the padding of my full plate," don't try to single out the armored kilt as a separate piece.
Adding an armored kilt to an existing set of armor has the effect of creating a new type of armor, just as studded leather is leather with studs, chainmail is a chain shirt plus leg and arm coverings, and half-plate is chainmail plus plates. Once you add it to armor, don't think of it as a separate piece that you can add unique properties to, just consider the new armor as a whole. Just as you wouldn't say "I want to add magic to the studs of my studded leather armor" or "I want the plate parts of my half-plate to be adamantine" or even "I want to add enhancement bonuses just to the padding of my full plate," don't try to single out the armored kilt as a separate piece.
What if I add a +5 kilt to a +2 armor? Does the set now become a +5 set?
What if they both had armor abilities? Do the abilities stack? What if the combination of abilities would put the ability bonus equivalent over +5 or the overall effective armor modifier over +10 for the set?
I'd also be interested in the answers to Ravingdork's questions.
But as I understand SKR's post, any property the kilt might have had before adding it to the main armor (enchantment or special material) is ignored.
What I also would like to know is, what the "counts as" in the Armored Kilt description exactly means.
Is the higher armor category only relevant for the speed decreases or is the new combined armor completely in the higher category, thus affecting all feats and possible effects - especially the armor proficiency feats?
Also could someone please look at my Adventurer's Armory polearm questions/issues?
|
see, the way I look at it none of this is an issue at all.
Based on the way SKR and JJ have said before, it is a separate suit of armor.
You don't actually go around with an armored skirt that you put on and then take off and switch to another suit of armor. Just like you don't change the studs of studded leather armor.
You enchant your armored kilt with +1, that is cool, you have a +1 armored kilt. End of story.
OR you can enchant your Breastplate with armored Kilt set of armor with a +1 enchantment. End of story.
But you don't take your +1 armored kilt and add it to any piece you come across. I think that is the confusion. An armored kilt is an entirely different suit of armor from a breastplate with armored kilt. Just like you don't take +1 padded armor and add it to full plate, just like you don't take a +1 breastplate and add it to full plate, just like you don't take +1 leather and add some studs to make it studded leather...
|
|
I'd also be interested in the answers to Ravingdork's questions.
But as I understand SKR's post, any property the kilt might have had before adding it to the main armor (enchantment or special material) is ignored.What I also would like to know is, what the "counts as" in the Armored Kilt description exactly means.
Is the higher armor category only relevant for the speed decreases or is the new combined armor completely in the higher category, thus affecting all feats and possible effects - especially the armor proficiency feats?Also could someone please look at my Adventurer's Armory polearm questions/issues?
counts as...
leather armor = light armor
leather armor with armored kilt = medium armor in all respects
just the same way as breastplate = medium armor and fullplate = heavy armor...
so if you don't have proficiency with medium armor, I would not suggest adding it to your leather armor...
So, if I understand you correctly, in the end it comes down to WHO adds the kilt to the main armor: the DM or the player.
If the DM adds it, that means the players can either find/buy armors with or without kilts and there's nothing they can do or change about it.
Or, if the player adds it, he could remove it or wear it separately whenever he wanted, which would lead to the questions mentioned above.
As for which one it is, after thinking about it, I would still tend towards the player. The reason being, that it is a separate item and thus can be found separately and attached afterwards.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
see, the way I look at it none of this is an issue at all.
Based on the way SKR and JJ have said before, it is a separate suit of armor.
You don't actually go around with an armored skirt that you put on and then take off and switch to another suit of armor. Just like you don't change the studs of studded leather armor.
You enchant your armored kilt with +1, that is cool, you have a +1 armored kilt. End of story.
OR you can enchant your Breastplate with armored Kilt set of armor with a +1 enchantment. End of story.
But you don't take your +1 armored kilt and add it to any piece you come across. I think that is the confusion. An armored kilt is an entirely different suit of armor from a breastplate with armored kilt. Just like you don't take +1 padded armor and add it to full plate, just like you don't take a +1 breastplate and add it to full plate, just like you don't take +1 leather and add some studs to make it studded leather...
This.
|
So to clarify, an armored kilt is similar to a masterwork upgrade? You can buy an armored kilt by itself, or you can buy a suit of armor w/armored kilt attached. You could not buy an armored kilt (by itself) and then later attach it to a suit of armor though?
If you *can* do the latter, then the question of what happens when you attach an enchanted armored kilt to a normal suit of armor comes up again.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So to clarify, an armored kilt is similar to a masterwork upgrade? You can buy an armored kilt by itself, or you can buy a suit of armor w/armored kilt attached.
Correct.
You could not buy an armored kilt (by itself) and then later attach it to a suit of armor though?
Incorrect. You can add the kilt to armor without any special knowledge; it's an exception to the "one suit of armor at a time" rule.
If you *can* do the latter, then the question of what happens when you attach an enchanted armored kilt to a normal suit of armor comes up again.
For simplicity, I'd use the plus-based powers of the main armor and ignore the plus-based powers of the kilt, otherwise you're cheesing your way past the normal pricing rules for magical armor; i.e., you shouldn't be able to add a +1 heavy fortification armored kilt (16,000gp) to +3 chainmail (9,000gp) and treat the set as if it were +3 heavy fortification chainmail with armored kilt for only 25,000gp, when a suit of +3 heavy fortification chainmail normally costs 49,000gp.
It wouldn't be abusive of the pricing rules to allow you to keep the benefit of an energy resistance armored kilt (+18,000 for that property, ignoring the enhancement bonus for now) while wearing other magical armor because that's a flat gp addition rather than using the plus-based pricing (it would cost the same for the armored kilt or to add it to your actual armor); however, I wouldn't let you use that precedent to start adding on a bunch of other armor pieces (shoulders, greaves, etc.) with flat-cost armor properties... assembling piecemeal armor for specific battles, or passing around pieces of armor to create optimized sets is prone to exploitation.
Which means in most cases, you'd never want to make a +5 armored kilt (in the same way you'd never want to make +5 studded leather studs for studded leather).
If you *can* do the latter, then the question of what happens when you attach an enchanted armored kilt to a normal suit of armor comes up again.For simplicity, I'd use the plus-based powers of the main armor and ignore the plus-based powers of the kilt, otherwise you're cheesing your way past the normal pricing rules for magical armor; i.e., you shouldn't be able to add a +1 heavy fortification armored kilt (16,000gp) to +3 chainmail (9,000gp) and treat the set as if it were +3 heavy fortification chainmail with armored kilt for only 25,000gp, when a suit of +3 heavy fortification chainmail normally costs 49,000gp.
If it ever came up in my games (which I doubt) I'd probably rule that you would use whichever had the strongest set of enchantments. So in the example above, you'd end up with a +1 heavy fortification chainmail with kilt.
It might allow for some odd flexibility in equipment, but that's probably ok considering the amount they'd be spending on enchanting two items that they could only use one at a time.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks Sean!
For simplicity, I'd use the plus-based powers of the main armor and ignore the plus-based powers of the kilt, otherwise you're cheesing your way past the normal pricing rules for magical armor; i.e., you shouldn't be able to add a +1 heavy fortification armored kilt (16,000gp) to +3 chainmail (9,000gp) and treat the set as if it were +3 heavy fortification chainmail with armored kilt for only 25,000gp, when a suit of +3 heavy fortification chainmail normally costs 49,000gp.
It wouldn't be abusive of the pricing rules to allow you to keep the benefit of an energy resistance armored kilt (+18,000 for that property, ignoring the enhancement bonus for now) while wearing other magical armor because that's a flat gp addition rather than using the plus-based pricing (it would cost the same for the armored kilt or to add it to your actual armor); however, I wouldn't let you use that precedent to start adding on a bunch of other armor pieces (shoulders, greaves, etc.) with flat-cost armor properties... assembling piecemeal armor for specific battles, or passing around pieces of armor to create optimized sets is prone to exploitation.
Which means in most cases, you'd never want to make a +5 armored kilt (in the same way you'd never want to make +5 studded leather studs for studded leather).
That's how I originally understood it. Just ignore any properties the kilt might have had when it was a separate item. When you remove it from the main armor again, they resurface.
Also, this should affect all properties of the kilt including special materials (except for weight changes).
I've a question, Mr Reynolds, and it might be slightly cheesy, but if a PC/NPC was to have a Mithril Breastplate, a Mithril Armored Kilt, would it still count as a Medium suit of armor?
A Mithril Breastplate is 'one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations. Heavy armors are treated as Medium, Medium armors are treated as Light, but Light armors are still treated as Light.'. But the wording of the Armored Kilt 'increases the armor's weight category (from light to medium and from medium to heavy).'
Does this mean that a player counts the Mithril Breastplate as a Light Armor, then with the addition of the Armored Kilt, treats the whole kit-and-kaboodle as a suit of Medium Armor, or is all they are doing making a rather lightweight and flexible version of Heavy Armor? They way I am reading this, even if the Armored Kilt is just plain ordinary steel, it would still count as 'up-grading' the base-armor it is being added to into a heavier grade, but the mithril qualities of the breastplate (and potentially the kilt too) pull it towards a Light Armor angle.
I've house-ruled this as a 'Medium' armor when it cropped up in game, but was this the correct ruling. I'm not about to yoink it from the player after they went through all the shenanigans of finding an Elf willing to make a suit of Mithril armor for a Half-Orc Barbarian, but I'd prefer to have as little jours fromage spécial in my games as I can.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've a question, Mr Reynolds, and it might be slightly cheesy, but if a PC/NPC was to have a Mithril Breastplate, a Mithril Armored Kilt, would it still count as a Medium suit of armor?
A Mithril Breastplate is 'one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations. Heavy armors are treated as Medium, Medium armors are treated as Light, but Light armors are still treated as Light.'. But the wording of the Armored Kilt 'increases the armor's weight category (from light to medium and from medium to heavy).'
Does this mean that a player counts the Mithril Breastplate as a Light Armor, then with the addition of the Armored Kilt, treats the whole kit-and-kaboodle as a suit of Medium Armor, or is all they are doing making a rather lightweight and flexible version of Heavy Armor? They way I am reading this, even if the Armored Kilt is just plain ordinary steel, it would still count as 'up-grading' the base-armor it is being added to into a heavier grade, but the mithril qualities of the breastplate (and potentially the kilt too) pull it towards a Light Armor angle.
I've house-ruled this as a 'Medium' armor when it cropped up in game, but was this the correct ruling. I'm not about to yoink it from the player after they went through all the shenanigans of finding an Elf willing to make a suit of Mithril armor for a Half-Orc Barbarian, but I'd prefer to have as little jours fromage spécial in my games as I can.
I think the least brain explody way to look at this is to take the base armor pieces, and add mithril to the whole, not individually.
Breast Plate + Armored Kilt = Heavy Armor. Heavy Armor + Mithril = Medium Armor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the least brain explody way to look at this is to take the base armor pieces, and add mithril to the whole, not individually.
Breast Plate + Armored Kilt = Heavy Armor. Heavy Armor + Mithril = Medium Armor.
That's how I'd rule it but I wasn't sure if I had gotten the interpretation of it down right, given the language used to describe both Mithril and Armored Kilt are slightly different...
In this game, the Devil is always in the details *gives Asmodeus a dirty look*
I agree with your ruling. In fact the Armored Kilt wouldn't even have to be made of Mithril for this to work (just the Breastplate).
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Breast Plate + Armored Kilt = Heavy Armor. Heavy Armor + Mithril = Medium Armor.
That's how I'd do it.
I have an additional question to add to this thread.
My bard is proficient with light armor, but wearing medium armor would incur a spell failure chance.
As of now he wears a chain shirt (light armor). If he wore an armored kilt as well, the set would become medium armor, and he would incur a penalty check as well as spell failure chance.
However, the check and spell failure on the kilt are both 0. Does this mean that he can wear his chainmail and kilt without incurring a penalty, because he is proficient with the only piece of armor that would incur penalties in this set?
|
|
I have an additional question to add to this thread.
My bard is proficient with light armor, but wearing medium armor would incur a spell failure chance.
As of now he wears a chain shirt (light armor). If he wore an armored kilt as well, the set would become medium armor, and he would incur a penalty check as well as spell failure chance.
However, the check and spell failure on the kilt are both 0. Does this mean that he can wear his chainmail and kilt without incurring a penalty, because he is proficient with the only piece of armor that would incur penalties in this set?
How I would rule it is that since the set becomes medium armor (which the bard is not proficient in), he suddenly incurs all ACP and spell failure as normal. If those numbers both happen to be zero, well, then it doesn't really matter, does it?
I think the least brain explody way to look at this is to take the base armor pieces, and add mithril to the whole, not individually.
Breast Plate + Armored Kilt = Heavy Armor. Heavy Armor + Mithril = Medium Armor.
That's how I'd rule it but I wasn't sure if I had gotten the interpretation of it down right, given the language used to describe both Mithril and Armored Kilt are slightly different...
In this game, the Devil is always in the details *gives Asmodeus a dirty look*
While reading up on a different rule, I happened across the Mithril entry and now I must revise my previous agreement.
The rules on the pages 154-155 state that: "This decrease [in weight category] does not apply to proficiency in wearing the armor."
Thus while the weight category would be medium armor, the proficiency would still be heavy armor, because of the armored kilt (which - apparently - increases the armor category on all accounts, not just on weight).
However, the check and spell failure on the kilt are both 0. Does this mean that he can wear his chainmail and kilt without incurring a penalty, because he is proficient with the only piece of armor that would incur penalties in this set?
He'd still have to take into account the ACP and SF for the chain shirt, as "chain shirt plus armored kilt" is effectively a new kind of armor, with the combined penalties of both (though all the penalties come from the chain shirt).
While reading up on a different rule, I happened across the Mithril entry and now I must revise my previous agreement.
The rules on the pages 154-155 state that: "This decrease [in weight category] does not apply to proficiency in wearing the armor."
Thus while the weight category would be medium armor, the proficiency would still be heavy armor, because of the armored kilt (which - apparently - increases the armor category on all accounts, not just on weight).
Mmmm. This is another part of the rules that concerns me. I'm going to let this slide in the current game but I think you've hit the nail on the head. The Barbarian would have needed Heavy Armor Proficiency for this to work, under what you've posted.
Mmmm. This is another part of the rules that concerns me. I'm going to let this slide in the current game but I think you've hit the nail on the head. The Barbarian would have needed Heavy Armor Proficiency for this to work, under what you've posted.While reading up on a different rule, I happened across the Mithril entry and now I must revise my previous agreement.
The rules on the pages 154-155 state that: "This decrease [in weight category] does not apply to proficiency in wearing the armor."
Thus while the weight category would be medium armor, the proficiency would still be heavy armor, because of the armored kilt (which - apparently - increases the armor category on all accounts, not just on weight).
He's right. I was focusing on the weight of the armor and neglected the proficiency part (In fact, I totally missed that the PC was a Barbarian). The whole suit would indeed count as Heavy Armor for purpose of proficiency.
i had a player interested in adding an armor kilt to his magical armor later on in his career path. he's a rogue now and will be taking fighter levels later.
this thread is old but it does have some opinions by SR,(i don't take developer posts as raw unless they back it up with errata). I still see some newer threads on armored kilts from time to time so maybe if i throw in a newer post it will point people in the right direction.
If your of the type that takes developer comments as RAW then consider the case closed. but, I disagree with a small aspect of SR's ruling. I think the rules as written already cover the armored kilt pretty well.
This is why i disagree and how i have ruled it.
there is already rules for armor bonuses and that they do not stack. if you wear multiple sets of armor,i couldn't find the ruling, but im pretty sure it used to be only the top layer counted for properties and you use the highest armor bonus of all the armors worn.
i did find under the APG under armored coat- If worn over other armor, use the better AC bonus and worse value in all other categories; an armored coat has no effect if worn with heavy armor. The only magic effects that apply are those worn on top.
this seems to reinforce those rules but it may also bend them to in the armored coats favor to "override" the normal rules. Since an armored kilt is not technically under neath the armor i still think in the case if actual armor is worn it would be SECONDARY protection. And thus none of it's magical properties would function. The same as wearing 3 magical rings.
It also states under the armored kilt that it can be added to an existing suit of armor and it increases the suit of armors base AC by 1, and that is a special property of the kilt. It's pretty clear in this case. It doesn't matter WHAT the kilt has been enchanted with as per the armor it only raises the suit of armor its added to by 1, it doesn't say add the kilts AC bonus to the suit of armor.
Really the only thing that isn't clear would be properties like energy resistance, like SR referred to, qualities that are a flat GP cost. i also don't think this would be game breaking and would have minor advantages AND disadvantages. After all if your main suit of armor has a higher CL then it's less likely to be disenchanted or destroyed. On the other hand a kilt in this fashion could be useful to transfer from party member to party member. In this case you would pick your poison.
I ruled like the armored coat, in that since the kilt is underneath (secondary armor) NONE of its magic effects would take place.
The part i disagree with SR is that a kilt can't be transferred from one suit to another and that it is somehow permanently part of the armor once attached and enchanted. Since armor bonuses don't stack, magical effects wont function, and the kilt description covers the rest, i feel this is just adding limitations and more complexity to the kilt's description than it simply doesn't even hint at. If this was the case you couldn't swap out the gauntlets or boots of a suit of magical full platemail for other magical gauntlets or boots because the armor was enchanted with them from the start and couldn't be separated- it's the same exact thing. If a character wants to add an armored kilt to his elven chain or celestial armor he should have the option.
As for how the magical armored kilt would react once attached to a suit of armor, like a stated above, i think the rules already cover it well enough. People just overlooked the rules already in place.
I've gone the Mithral Agile Breastplate route and added an Armored Kilt. While I would like to make BOTH Mithral and thus have a "Light" suit of "Heavy" armor...I understand that may well be broken. IF it is cheaper and just as effective to do a Mithral Breastplate with a REGULAR kilt as it would still qualify as "Medium" armor for speed...I'll just do that.
Essentially, if anyone is still responding to this, final word on Mithral Medium Armor +(Mithral) Kilt =20ft or 30ft speed?
I would love the +10ft but considering my character will often enough be mounted, this isn't really a big issue except closing in on foot after the barbarian rushes in.
Breast Plate + Armored Kilt = Heavy Armor. Heavy Armor + Mithril = Medium Armor.That's how I'd do it.
If we do it this way we have an answer to the "mithral heavy armor + armored kilt" question because:
Heavy armor + kilt = not possible. Not possible + mithral = doesn't matter.
Essentially, if anyone is still responding to this, final word on Mithral Medium Armor +(Mithral) Kilt =20ft or 30ft speed?
20ft. The mithril quality affects the armor as a whole. So medium armor + kilt = heavy armor. Mithril heavy armor is treated as medium armor.
Essentially, if anyone is still responding to this, final word on Mithral Medium Armor +(Mithral) Kilt =20ft or 30ft speed?20ft. The mithril quality affects the armor as a whole. So medium armor + kilt = heavy armor. Mithril heavy armor is treated as medium armor.
Thanks, pardon the thread resurrection, but after much sifting I couldn't get that specific issue spelled out effectively. Mithral Light and (Mithral) Armored Kilt might allow 30ft, but I still would figure that adds up to "Medium" Armor so my only recourse for an on foot (non-magical) speed increase is to drop the kilt (as it were) and/or dip Barbarian. The only real advantage to mithraling the kilt then would be to reduce its weight (which is why I wonder about armor encumbrance changing).
As it is, I'm planning on more of a hang in the back and charge in on horseback/"aggro" the big bad to turn the tide of battle kind of character (cleric3/strategist luring cavalier8). So 20ft isn't a let down, I'd just rather be accurate, I could drop it and get 30ft and the same AC by making my breastplate +2...I just kind of want to use that 2nd +1 bonus for the "Champion" armor quality and wear a kilt for the hell of it.
From what I've read it can be added to a suit of armor, or made for a suit, but effectively acts as part of the suit, while I think I could swap it with some easy checks, that shouldn't be a major issue. I think I might mithral the kilt anyway, just to be sure to gain the benefits of wearing mithral armor. There's some suggestion that it wouldn't really matter, but I've heard enough mention of it needing to be mithral to work as mithral armor overall (or at least it effectively has to be the same or not have a special material). I'm fine with whatever. It just got confusing and I don't want to come to my dm with more oddball equipment and no explanation or an illegal number. I'll probably just simplify and do my math where necessary.
Necromancers shouldn't wear armor.I've gone the Mithral Agile Breastplate route and added an Armored Kilt. While I would like to make BOTH Mithral and thus have a "Light" suit of "Heavy" armor...I understand that may well be broken. IF it is cheaper and just as effective to do a Mithral Breastplate with a REGULAR kilt as it would still qualify as "Medium" armor for speed...I'll just do that.
Essentially, if anyone is still responding to this, final word on Mithral Medium Armor +(Mithral) Kilt =20ft or 30ft speed?
I would love the +10ft but considering my character will often enough be mounted, this isn't really a big issue except closing in on foot after the barbarian rushes in.
Noted. Glad I'm not playing one. ;)
Breast Plate + Armored Kilt = Heavy Armor. Heavy Armor + Mithril = Medium Armor.That's how I'd do it.If we do it this way we have an answer to the "mithral heavy armor + armored kilt" question because:
Heavy armor + kilt = not possible. Not possible + mithral = doesn't matter.
I think somewhere I confused you, but yes. the math doesn't work. Light and light become medium anyway. proficiency would still be heavy and making a medium armor heavy is the limitation of the kilt. It doesn't make a half-weight light armor, light armor, it makes it medium. If there remains any doubt in my mind about this distinction should it come up, I'll try a quick chat with my DM and the resident rules lawyer.
I realize it's been some time since this threat was posted in. However, through the evolution of the posts I noticed something. Bracers of Armor, Armor Kilt, and the Mage Armor Spell. Somewhere along the line it seems these three can be worn by a caster in conjunction as long as the AC bonuses equal each other to negate any single part of it being turned off. Is there a discussion of this anywhere else?
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
You you are saying you have +4 armor from all three? So you get benefits from all three?
Based on the above comments (such as SKR saying trying to treat them separate to get more abilities) I'd say you are best to treat it similarly.
If they all have the same armor bonus, pick one to contribute abilities and ignore the rest.
I realize it's been some time since this threat was posted in. However, through the evolution of the posts I noticed something. Bracers of Armor, Armor Kilt, and the Mage Armor Spell. Somewhere along the line it seems these three can be worn by a caster in conjunction as long as the AC bonuses equal each other to negate any single part of it being turned off. Is there a discussion of this anywhere else?
If you've think you've found an exploit in the rules, its usually better to assume you're thinking incorrectly.
All provide armor bonuses, and armor bonuses do not stack.
