|
| 9 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Alright so here's the situation. I have had a character who stays in wildshape all day as a small elemental, using dex for his to hit and damage(weapon finesse, and agile on an amulet of mighty fists).
He recently acquired +1 wild stoneplate (a dwarven fullplate), bumping his ac up by 10 and claiming that he gets none of the penalties of the armor despite not being proficient to begin with because it melds into his body when he polymorphs.
I've looked into this and from what people on the boards say seems to agree, but from the core book it actually never says you loose the penalties just the bonuses.
Either way using dexterity to its full ability while also getting the benefit of full plate and none of the drawbacks just seems off power wise. you can argue wild is +3 because of this but items of comparable price are no where near +10 AC. 16000 bracers are a +4 for example. It concerns me also since one of a fighters shticks is being the best in armor, and honestly this kinda makes a druid better at wearing armor when they can afford it up until high level.
This character is already an urban barbarian as well, uping dex with the rage, and they were also inquiring if they count as wearing armor wild shape for if they took levels in Monk, adding their wisdom modifier on top of the already ridiculous AC.
Either way I am curious for how other society GMs would rule on this, and whether they think it is legitimate or not. Currently this is around level 7 and though it was playing down in a 5-9 scenario, I would not be able to hit him without natural 20s.
|
Also, the polymorph rules state that armor and shield bonuses stop providing their benefit, not that the armor and shield go away altogether.
Read the sentence right before that one. Armor and shields meld into the body along with everything else. Have you been forcing wild shaped bird druids to take -3 on their fly checks because of the ACP on their hide armor? Perhaps you should be!
|
Also, the polymorph rules state that armor and shield bonuses stop providing their benefit, not that the armor and shield go away altogether.Read the sentence right before that one. Armor and shields meld into the body along with everything else. Have you been forcing wild shaped bird druids to take -3 on their fly checks because of the ACP on their hide armor? Perhaps you should be!
Yup.
|
|
And continuing to keep track of encumbrance, I imagine, since melded gear apparently doesn't actually go away....it just sits there....what's the weight limit divisor for a tiny creature, again?Yup.Also, the polymorph rules state that armor and shield bonuses stop providing their benefit, not that the armor and shield go away altogether.Read the sentence right before that one. Armor and shields meld into the body along with everything else. Have you been forcing wild shaped bird druids to take -3 on their fly checks because of the ACP on their hide armor? Perhaps you should be!
no, but polymorphed gear changes sizes, and as such its weight will drastically reduce. The chance that the weight ratio between size and new strength based on the Beastshape spell penalties incurred is probably nil. As a matter of fact, it probably means that the tiny creature can carry more than it could when not tiny, relatively.
But armor check penalty is not based on weight of the armor. Its based on how difficult the armor is to move about in.
|
|
The implication is certainly that Armor and Shield "bonuses" cease to function while wild shaped. It is not clear whether or not the Penalties were shut off, as the previous sentence is that Items with bonuses continue to function (and makes no mention of penalties). Sounds like Polymorph might shut off cursed items!
Relevant Rules Text Under Magic in the PRD website:
When you cast a polymorph spell that changes you into a creature of the animal, dragon, elemental, magical beast, plant, or vermin type, all of your gear melds into your body. Items that provide constant bonuses and do not need to be activated continue to function while melded in this way (with the exception of armor and shield bonuses, which cease to function).
Relevant WILD rules text:
The wearer of a suit of armor or a shield with this ability preserves his armor bonus (and any enhancement bonus) while in a wild shape.
As a GM you could probably argue the application of penalties either way. I think the RAI is that while wild shaped normally, the bonuses and penalties disappear, and with WILD armor you get the bonuses and penalties back. Unfortunately, the RAW reads that you either never or always take the armor penalties #as the WILD enhancement makes no mention of the penalties#.
I would say that if you rule that this player has to take the penalties with his Wild armor, you have to rule those same penalties apply to every wild shaping druid #even those without WILD armor#. If you're going to rule on a grey area of the rules (if you agree that it is a gray area), you should be consistent in how that ruling is applied.
On my druid, I always took the penalties by accident since I use pencil and paper, and when wild shaped never bothered to "delete" the penalties.
I don't see where anyone has said that you wouldn't get the penalties if using the wild special armor ability.
But you are correct, one should consistently rule where consistency is obvious.
|
|
So, what does melded actually mean to you, then? Gear that's melded is inaccessible, so it's not just invisible. You can't take off or even touch your melded armor. How is it restricting your movement? Someone wearing medium armor who uses beast shape still continues to move at a reduced speed?
Can you remove wild armor, or is it still inaccessible?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He definitely should get the penalties to max dex, speed, and ACP (including to attack rolls if he isn't proficient in Heavy Armor).
When you point this out, ask him if he prefers all druids (even without wild armor) take armor check penalties, or if he wants to play it the sensible way and only apply it with Wild armor. If he wants the former (inflicting the "punishment" on everyone), stop playing with him, he's a jerk. (And yes, I realize this is PFS - abusers of the public trust are the worst).
|
| 15 people marked this as a favorite. |
Archdruid: Hey guys, thanks for coming.
Druid 1: No probs man. We love what you've done with the grove.
Archdruid: Thanks man. But ah, I have some bad news.
Druid 2: What?
Archdruid: It sounds like because of multiple item enchantments, archetype and bestiary cherry picking shenanigans, all armour will now hinder us when we polymorph into animals.
Druid 1: No way man. My hide armour gets magically absorbed into my body. That's so not cool.
Druid 2: What are you saying? You don't mean that after I give my Prophecy of Doom to the logging camp, I can't turn into a raven and fly away?
Archdruid: Oh sure, you can do that just fine. It's just you need to spend a few minutes removing your armour before you turn into a raven and fly away. Otherwise you will be flying like a bird wearing heavy armour and that would be *ridiculous*
Druid 1: Hrmn. But at least we still get the protections of the armour, right?
Archdruid: Only if you buy Wild armour.
Druid 2: Isn't that at minimum 16,000 gold? Even if you don't take into consideration special materials for heavy armour?
Archdruid: Ayup.
Druid 1: Hrmngh.
Druid 2: Could this be a byproduct of the fact that we as a class are best positioned to gain all the different armour bonuses and stack them willy-nilly?
Druid 1: Not to mention all the strangely worded rulings over natural-natural armour bonus and enhancement of natural armour bonuses?
Druid 2: And the Dexterity 18 Stegosauruses.
Druid 1: Can't forget them.
Barkskinned Stegosaurus Herd, All Wearing Chainshirt Barding with Bandoliers full of Potions of Shield of Faith: *deafening roar*
Archdruid: Sometimes I question my decisions in the forces I have assembled.
|
|
Except the 'melded' section can't only be fluff, because what about the character's sword? That is inaccessible. Or potions - those are melded too, and they can't access them.
However, one interpretation is that the ACP is simply a negative bonus (semantically unsound, I know). So losing armor bonuses loses the ACP, gaining armor bonuses restores the ACP. This is how I would rule it.
|
|
RAW I see nothing saying penalties are removed. Most people just interpreted the melded ibto as its gone. I don't think it is specifically gone though. The weight would still be around for encumberence and the armor can still stiffn joints. In the end it's all magic though so yeah.
I'm going to talk with him though less about the rules and more on the effect it causes. Other people get to do less when you make a character with almost no flaws and it just removes the fun of the challenge for many when it is no longer a challenge.
How about you tell him that he should retrain a feat to include heavy armor proficiency.
|
|
there has been thread after thread on this in various forms and I know cause I have scoured most of them
the more I see the more (ATM) I'm inclined to to believe that Nothing transfers
Non proficency ... Armor check ... weight - none of it
especially in light of a ruling from PaizoCon that allowed a Monk / Druid Wildshaped in Wild FullPlate to benefit from all his Monk abilities
now I agree that an official ruling NEEDS to be made and I am also not advocating either side as I can see it going either way
but I think ATM until a ruling comes down as a GM I would allow it
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A penalty is no a bonus, language simply does not work that way, RAW is clear you get the bonuses you do not get the penalties. A negative bonus is a nonsense being used because you do not like the conclusion. Here is the Oxford English Dictionaries definition, all the others I looked at were broadly similar and none worked for a negative figure. If you can have a negative bonus I pay my employer minus £20000 a year, and if that makes sense I'll happily regurgitate minus one of my hat.
To take the position that armour still gives its penalties while polymorphed is silly, we all know it does not it never has, and it never will. My none magical fullplate used to slow me down because it was heavy and restrictive, but now I've wildshaped and its vanished and it no longer weighs anything it slows me down because, uhhh, hmm, I don't want the wild property abused.
I think the preferable solution would be for wild armour to only work with armour you are proficient with. The suggestion that armour still weighs something while polymorphed is silly, druids can no longer turn into sparrows because their armour won't allow them to fly, they can wild shape will carrying their max load and weigh a tonne, etc. Silly and open to its own abuses.
If you leave the penalties on there, there's almost no reason not to just go in for barding instead and have the party play dressup.
|
|
It says it was answered in the FAQ in this post:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2owod?Wild-armor-allows-you-to-ignore-armor-pen alties#1
But I can't seem to find in the FAQ. Is it really in there or just my imagination?
(Dude, I'm not good with Messageboards, so please excuse my lack of hyperlinking the texts).
It says it was answered in the FAQ in this post:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2owod?Wild-armor-allows-you-to-ignore-armor-pen alties#1
But I can't seem to find in the FAQ. Is it really in there or just my imagination?
(Dude, I'm not good with Messageboards, so please excuse my lack of hyperlinking the texts).
Answered by many disagreeing voices maybe, but I didn't see any staff, much less Devs, in the discussion. If anything they just jumble the mess more by talking about Slick & other static armor/shield enchantments that aren't armor bonuses and whether those come or go, and about Bracers which aren't armor, but grant armor bonuses.
It's a mire.Shorthand is:
Polymorph rules say that armor & shield bonuses go away.
Most assume this means the penalties go away, but it doesn't say that. It does say the armor & shield meld into the form, and the ruling about Monk's not losing their no-armor abilities while Wildshaped in armor seems strong evidence the drawbacks, such as ACP/Max Dex, do go away.
Wild then says the armor or shield bonus is preserved, that's it, not that the armor changes shape or isn't melded. So it's still gone.
Note: the ability specifically say the armor cannot be seen.
So by RAW, and therefore PFS, this loophole remains open.
A Druid/Monk PC with Wild Dragonhide Plate +1 & Wild Large Wooden Shield +1 would have +13 AC with absolutely no drawbacks when Wildshaped, even having both arms/paws free.
It'd cost 35K+, or slightly less than +6 Bracers, for double the AC bonus and on items that can't be targeted.
Of course the first +10 AC at less than 20K is the big boon.
I can think of nothing comparable.
At 8th level, about when they could barely afford this, they could be Wildshaped at all times (choosing more docile forms for civilized areas).
About the only drawback is a Dispel might hit them and they lose a round Wildshaping back.
Again, for PFS, this appears unstoppable other than by diplomacy with the player.
Cheers
That's a unfair comparison, comparing their AC in armour and shield to an magic item that is so terribly overpriced it is rarely ever used, and then only by those who specifically have to avoid armour. Until they can afford an incredibly expensive item druids have to suffer big time in the AC department, then yes they get a sudden jump. For the same price anyone not wildshaping gets +6 AC which seems pretty reasonable to me.
James argument seems the best that we have, a druid who wants the massive plus to AC has to lay down both the coin for Wild Armour and take a feat for heavy armour proficiency. The OPs problem comes more from the fact that Agile is being exploited to make dex a viable main ability score than the Wild enhancement IMO.
|
I feel that I have to chip in the comment, as one of the druids that uses Wild breastplate armor.
To a certain extent, I feel that Wild armor enchantment only grant's armor bonus in Wildshape and that makes sense. Why? Well you just blew at least 15k gold on it. In this concept, it works fine.
What doesn't make sense is that druid can use both armor bonus and monk bonus from Wisdom to AC. This should receive errata or clarification at the very least. It's obvious that RAI, it's not supposed to work like that.
If both bonuses stack, people will look to find something to penalize such player who is, well, abusing the loophole in a way. Eventually a ban hammer will drop on both, and not only that player, but both my druid and his munchkin will feel the drawbacks of it.
The ACP in wild shape shouldn't exist. Wild armor simply makes druid's skin more "armorish" and durable. Non-proficiency penalty however should exist. It seems uncool way of bypassing the rules otherwise, just like J.J. said.
Adam
In the early days of the FAQ button, the only option the web-folks had was to check it as answered or not. Now they have more options to click when seeing threads in the FAQ queue. Posts that were not clear in what they are asking were sometimes checked as answered, thus clearing them from the queue to make room for FAQ flags on posts that asked clear questions.
If you really want an answer to a question — create a new thread, write a clear concise question, and then direct users to the thread to click the FAQ flag if they agree that it is important enough for the developers to address.
That's a unfair comparison, comparing their AC in armour and shield to an magic item that is so terribly overpriced it is rarely ever used, and then only by those who specifically have to avoid armour. Until they can afford an incredibly expensive item druids have to suffer big time in the AC department, then yes they get a sudden jump. For the same price anyone not wildshaping gets +6 AC which seems pretty reasonable to me.
James argument seems the best that we have, a druid who wants the massive plus to AC has to lay down both the coin for Wild Armour and take a feat for heavy armour proficiency. The OPs problem comes more from the fact that Agile is being exploited to make dex a viable main ability score than the Wild enhancement IMO.
True, Bracers of Armor are a poor choice, but they're the nearest thing.
I guess magic Studded Leather is the closest armor w/ 0 ACP, full move.
Studded Leather gets you +7 AC at 16K or +8 AC at 25K, and its Dex is capped at 5 (which would be an issue for the Dex-focused PC in the OP.)
Wild Plate gets you +10 AC at 19K, with no Dex cap and Monk AC bonus. (And miscellaneous other "no-armor" options.)
Celestial Armor gets you +9 AC for 22K, with a very high Dex cap, and Fly, so it's competitive, but it has a -2 ACP, would deactivate Monk bonuses, and is a named item so can never improve.
Hmm...this is so competitive maybe Wild Armor doesn't look so bad now.
(Other than that Monk AC trick & lack of proficiency loophole...)
Druids do not have AC issues.
2 PP gets you masterwork dragonhide breastplate. Enchant as normal. Add shield if desired. Pretty good for a caster with decent offensive spells or warrior with Shilleleigh.
Add Barkskin...
It's only Wildshaped Druids that have AC issues, but with 3+ attacks & pounce, I have little sympathy (and am thinking of a build I like right now).
Cheers
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
It's only Wildshaped Druids that have AC issues, but with 3+ attacks & pounce, I have little sympathy (and am thinking of a build I like right now).
Just as a note, my level 17 druid was a pure caster his entire career—wildshaping into an eagle is amazing for mobility, AC, and initiative—not everyone that wildshapes goes the melee route. Also, Quick Wild Shape is broken for spellcasters that need to get around the board.
I also want to mention that I dropped a lot of gold on my delving +2 wild stone plate, 36,950 gp to be exact. No GMs I played under docked me encumbrance for the armor when in bird form, or noted the ACP of not being proficient in heavy armor. If it had ever come up, I would have probably just taken the feat to avoid conflict since I had already invested in the armor. However, I may not have made the purchase in the first place if I knew I would have to take the feat.
I do see the argument points on both sides of this, but given the amount of gold being spent on something that has a chance of working completely differently for the player at certain tables, this is something that I would like clarified.
If someone starts a new FAQ I'd be happy to click it.
It's only Wildshaped Druids that have AC issues, but with 3+ attacks & pounce, I have little sympathy (and am thinking of a build I like right now)....
I do see the argument points on both sides of this, but given the amount of gold being spent on something ...
The 'amount of gold' is a pittance compared to the benefit. 26k (delving really doesn't factor in) for +11 AC? Even if you discount the first +4 (easy enough to get mage armor cast), that's less than 4k per AC point - as cheap as the first two pluses on rings of protection and amulets of natural armor, and it *stacks* with those. Even the next +1 on the armor is about the same price as going from +2 to +3 on a ring.
Another way of looking at it is comparing Druid AC with regular armor, to Wild shape AC with this armor. Wild shape adds about 2 AC in Beast, 5 AC in Elemental form for combat druids, 5-7 AC in Beast for caster/small forms. The Full plate +2, Wild costs about the same as the Breastplate +5, for the same AC bonus, although the breastplate is capped, the wild isn't. So that means the Wild shape bonus is pure gravy (+7 for diminutive beast shape).
+7 AC (or even +2 AC) isn't worth one feat? Isn't worth taking the Armor Check Penalty even with the feat? Be real.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
It's only Wildshaped Druids that have AC issues, but with 3+ attacks & pounce, I have little sympathy (and am thinking of a build I like right now)....
I do see the argument points on both sides of this, but given the amount of gold being spent on something ...The 'amount of gold' is a pittance compared to the benefit. 26k (delving really doesn't factor in) for +11 AC? Even if you discount the first +4 (easy enough to get mage armor cast), that's less than 4k per AC point - as cheap as the first two pluses on rings of protection and amulets of natural armor, and it *stacks* with those. Even the next +1 on the armor is about the same price as going from +2 to +3 on a ring.
Another way of looking at it is comparing Druid AC with regular armor, to Wild shape AC with this armor. Wild shape adds about 2 AC in Beast, 5 AC in Elemental form for combat druids, 5-7 AC in Beast for caster/small forms. The Full plate +2, Wild costs about the same as the Breastplate +5, for the same AC bonus, although the breastplate is capped, the wild isn't. So that means the Wild shape bonus is pure gravy (+7 for diminutive beast shape).
+7 AC (or even +2 AC) isn't worth one feat? Isn't worth taking the Armor Check Penalty even with the feat? Be real.
Golly, I seem to have been misunderstood. Allow me to be clearer.
I think that when a player plans to invest over 20,000 gold in an item, it's a good idea to have a clear understanding of how that item functions. This thread alone is evidence that there is not a consensus on how it works. Asking for clarification on this is quite reasonable.
|
|
My Nagaji Saurian Shaman tends to wildshape into a Huge Allosaurus. That's his schtick.
Without Armor, his AC as an allosaurus is based on Beast Shape III, not on the Allosaurus.
So I gain +6 Str, +6 Natural Armor, -4 Dex, and becomes Huge.
My Druid has a 10 Dex.
So 10 - 2 (6 Dex) +6 (NA) -2 (Huge Size) = 12 AC.
He has a Ring of Protection which adds to his AC.
He also has +2 Jousting Wild Dragonhide Full Plate Armor.
This raises his standard AC from 12 to 24.
24 at 14th level is really not that high of an AC.
Now granted, if I had more deflection and barkskin or an amulet of natural armor, I could easily get his AC into the 30s or higher.
But just having the wild armor itself is not game breaking. Its when you add all the adjustments possible together, that game breaking ACs happen.
That's not a good example, Andrew, because you are underplaying him.
The armor you have is still powerful, whether you choose to have the other bonuses or not.
A simple Shield of Faith from a comparable buddy & a Barkskin from yourself puts you in the 30's without any strain on resources.
As you said, easily.
And a Nagaji Saurian Shaman sounds really cool, BTW.
On the other hand, a Druid with a much higher Dex can escape the Max Dex limit that makes Full Plate reasonable and have a huge AC simply for having Wildshape, which already gives an AC bonus. (Net +4 even for your dino.)
As for YMMV, I don't think it necessarily can, if one were to print out all the rules and highlight the various parts. As RAW, at least on the AC portion of the armor & lack of penalties, is fairly clear.
As for non-AC bonuses on armor, it is quite messy on whether Wild allows those to work or not, or because they are passive & non-AC, whether they work with or without Wild.
Tough stuff, Cheers.
|
|
Except that my Saurian Shaman doesn't have to wild shape to be pretty effective. His AC is 26 before wild shaping.
And if you saw him work at the table, I doubt you'd say he was underpowered.
The point is, that I didn't spend all my resources on making him unbeatable. I spent resources on making him versatile and effective at the same time.
I didn't say underpowered. There are a lot more factors than AC, most especially player skill.
But in the context of Armor Class, you are underplaying him by having a lower than normal AC and Dex for melee, which you implied he was by saying being an allosaurus was your schtick.
If you're AC 26 before Wildshape, it sounds like you go up to 30 (unless there's a shield in there, I suppose). Frankly, AC 24 sounds darn right dangerous at 14th. At 7th, my Druid hybrid gets hit often with a higher AC than that. (Admittedly, I last played him in the two Bonekeep mods, so my perspective might be off.)
Anyway, good luck, sounds like a fun PC,
Cheers
Just for comparison, I played a druid in a pbp game for a few years. Started in 3.5 and converted to pathfinder at some point. For a long time I thought the armor limitations persisted in wild shape. Also, in the lower levels you don't spend all your time in wild shape, so armor limitation are important to consider. In higher levels it is tempting to remain in elemental shape all day, but even then on missions where you can't regain your powers (ie wild shape uses per day) You can still spend time out of wild shape.
For my higher level build (17 level) I used Bracers of AC +7, a +1 darkwood shield with wild, ring of protection +4, extend barkskin +5, rose ioun stone +1, and A dex bonus of +6. A total AC around 36 plus whatever shape's added dex and natural AC.
My Druid has a 10 Dex.
He has a Ring of Protection which adds to his AC. He also has +2 Jousting Wild Dragonhide Full Plate Armor. This raises his standard AC from 12 to 24.
24 at 14th level is really not that high of an AC.
... Okay... Ranger, 10 Dex, Breastplate +5, Ring of Protection +1 = AC 22. You're still 2 AC ahead of a comparable character. And this is with the weakest use (larger beast forms) - large Elemental would add 5 AC, small beast adds 7 AC. {Castilliano, you're forgetting the size decrease fyi}
AC is the one stat the almost always costs resources to gain more of, because otherwise defenses would overwhelm all offenses. Each incremental gain generally costs more and more (1k for +1 armor, 2k for a ring/amulet, 3k/5k for another +1/+2 armor, 5k for a ioun stone, 6k for another ring/amulet plus, etc.
Wild is dirt cheap for what it does, even after you take off a bit to account for the loss of the cheapest bonuses (regular armor). It doesn't need to be even cheaper (i.e. no feat, no check penalties, etc.)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just reading the first two responses...
They'd still take the penalties.
They wouldn't take any penalties.
Paizo Rules Questions subforum in a nutshell?
The thing is the wild enchant is almost worthless if it doesn't negate the penalties, since you can just put on barding for your combat form.
The thing is the wild enchant is almost worthless if it doesn't negate the penalties, since you can just put on barding for your combat form.
Wild enchant was badly written in 3.0 and that carried over. For example it doesn't mention it carries over shield bonus, it only mentions retaining armor bonuses.
So much of it has to be ruled from what we perceive to be intended and yeah the no ACP is one of those things that has to be a gut call.
Personally I allow users to not take ACP or Max Dex because for the price it doesn't seem to be worth it otherwise. I still count it as wearing armor though so that Monk abilities and such don't stack.
The thing is the wild enchant is almost worthless if it doesn't negate the penalties, since you can just put on barding for your combat form.
Sure, if you want to buy two sets of armor, carry it, and spend 4 minutes putting it on every time you change into one single form that matches the armor. Good luck aiding on a delicate diplomacy check as a sabre-tooth tiger.
