|
This isn't a PFS-specific question, so I'll flag it to be moved to the Rules Questions Forum.
But to answer your question, no, a Mithral Breastplate cannot be enchanted with Brawling.
The brawling ability can be applied only to light armor.
A Breastplate is a medium armor.
mithral armors are one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations.
I see "other limitations" as something that brawling would fall under. Brawling can only be on light, mithral has them be light, now it works.
Expect table variation.
Some GM's might say you can't use the ability at their table.
So would you rather have the +6 AC all the time and the brawler enchantment some of the time OR the +4 AC and brawler enchantment all the time. {shrug} Your choice.
|
Considering that Mithral armor still requires the initial armor category usage feat, I am going to assume that "limitations" applies only to drawbacks such as penalties to class abilities that state they only function in certain types of armor. I don't think it actually qualifies the armor as being the lighter category for enhancement purposes.
|
Yeah, this really isn't a PFS specific question.
Looking at the brawler class (the armor enhancement is obviously intended for them, and maybe Sohei monks) they can wear mithral breastplate since it counts as light armor for their AC bonus (just like it counts for other things like a low level magus/summoner/bard in mithral breastplate being able to cast ).
Since this can be part of the natural progression for the class it is intended to work for, I am inclined to allow it.
That said, expect table variation, since brawlers can do a lot of things that will surprise GMs, my Paladin is going to dip into brawler to be able to flurry with a temple sword, while wearing a shield and a breastplate.
It is not broken, unless you consider the base enhancment broken, and considering stat allocations, chances are pretty much 95 & that such a brawler will not be able to fully benefit from the higher DEX bonus to AC.
|
|
Considering that Mithral armor still requires the initial armor category usage feat, I am going to assume that "limitations" applies only to drawbacks such as penalties to class abilities that state they only function in certain types of armor. I don't think it actually qualifies the armor as being the lighter category for enhancement purposes.
Actually this is a good point, something like the
Aura moderate transmutation CL 7th
Slot none; Price +1 bonus; Weight —
Description
Agile weapons are unusually well balanced and responsive. A wielder with the Weapon Finesse feat can choose to apply her Dexterity modifier to damage rolls with the weapon in place of her Strength modifier. This modifier to damage is not increased for two-handed weapons, but is still reduced for off-hand weapons. The agile weapon enhancement can only be placed on melee weapons that are usable with the Weapon Finesse feat.
Construction
Requirements Craft Magic Arms and Armor, cat’s grace; Price —.
as written will not work on a katana or similar weapon even if the user is a Swashbuckler and has slashing grace.
However in this case we only have to look at the interaction of items and not class features.
|
No GMs are going to audit your character anyway. So it won't matter when you simply tell him "you have brawling on your armor".
Now here comes the half a dozen people saying that someone will. Not the other tens of thousands of people that have never had their character audited.
So if you feel it's fair and it's only slightly a gray area (like this) then go for it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No GMs are going to audit your character anyway. So it won't matter when you simply tell him "you have brawling on your armor".
Now here comes the half a dozen people saying that someone will. Not the other tens of thousands of people that have never had their character audited.
So if you feel it's fair and it's only slightly a gray area (like this) then go for it.
This comes a little too close to "cheat, because you are unlikely to get caught" for my likeing.
I realise that in this case we haven't sussed out the answer to if it's legal or not, but I would advise against just going ahead and assuming things are legal until someone points it out to you in an audit. If it isn't downright dishonest then it's certainly well along a slippery slope to it.
|
|
Ok so simple question, at least I hope so. For PFS legal terms can a Mithral breast plate have the Brawlers enchantment. If the answer is yes can I please have a link to where someone higher up has said this. And if no the same please. If unknown, well then general thoughts on the matter.
I assume this is for your Emerald Spire PC? I would have to look over the enhancement, but, initial feeling, is no. Mithral lightens it up, for weight and movement, but it still qualifies as Medium for some purposes, so there is a good chance that the enhancement isn't supposed to work on it.
Seriously, this is the counter question on what level of Fortification you can put on mithral versions of armor.
Most mithral armors are one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations. Heavy armors are treated as medium, and medium armors are treated as light, but light armors are still treated as light. This decrease does not apply to proficiency in wearing the armor.
It's lighter for movement and other limitations. But it doesn't apply to proficiency. I don't see anything in here that would hint that it's not light for everything but proficiency. A medium armor is treated as light. Brawling can go onto light. Thus brawling can go onto mithral medium.
can a barbarian with heavy armor proficiency still get his extra speed bonus in mithril full plate? if this question has been answered, you would probably find that the answer is the same to your question
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
PFS legal terms can a Mithral breast plate have the Brawlers enchantment.
Expect table variance, so in PFS that means from time to time your breastplate will or will not have Brawler enhancement and you will need to inquire from every GM how they handle it less be caught in an audit and found illegal.
My advice, don't try.
|
|
No GMs are going to audit your character anyway. So it won't matter when you simply tell him "you have brawling on your armor".
Now here comes the half a dozen people saying that someone will. Not the other tens of thousands of people that have never had their character audited.
So if you feel it's fair and it's only slightly a gray area (like this) then go for it.
Funny thing, but I will. No ifs or butts about it, if a player gives me a reason to believe that his character includes some questionable assumptions, I will do an audit.
When this happens is obviously another issue, I am willing to venture the statement that characters that under and overperform get those audits. There is really no malice to it, if I audit it and see the mistake/questionable ruling I will tell the player.
You really don't want the GM to "catch" you in the middle of an adventure, since that tends to result in quite a bit of conflict.
|
|
Adding the following item to the discussion, which has interactions with the agile weapon enhancement and uses language similar to the mithral entry: (The item is for reasons of sanity not PFS legal btw)
Price 2,500 gp; Slot none; CL 15th; Weight —; Aura strong transmutation
DESCRIPTION
This elegant silk ribbon gleams like mithral and feels like polished steel.
When wrapped around the grip of a one-handed piercing or slashing melee weapon for 24 hours, the ribbon's magic permanently merges with the weapon, reducing the attack roll penalty incurred by a wielder who is smaller than the weapon's intended wielder by 2 (to a minimum penalty of 0).
If the weapon is wielded by a creature whose size matches that of the weapon's intended wielder, the weapon is treated as a light melee weapon when determining whether it can be used with Weapon Finesse, as well as with any feat, spell, or special weapon ability that can be used in conjunction with light weapons.
Once an effortless lace's abilities have been conveyed to a weapon, the ribbon must remain attached to the weapon or its effects end immediately, its magic is permanently lost, and it is reduced to worthless cloth. Effects that would dispel the magic of the weapon or cause the weapon to gain the broken condition (such as sundering) destroy the ribbon as well.
|
|
medium armors are treated as light
Seems like an easy one to me. As someone who just bought a +1 brawling chain shirt I can't imagine why I would ever spend 4000 gold on a medium armor though.
Also in terms to the Winter witch he says any touch spell ranged touch is still touch. Had other GMS allow that upon audit.
Frozen Caress (Su) Whenever the winter witch casts a touch spell..
Touch attacks come in two types: melee touch attacks and ranged touch attacks.
This ability doesn't care about melee or ranged touch. Only that it is a touch attack.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Well I'm hoping someone in charge will give me a answer cause I have heard in person yes and in person no. Also in terms to the Winter witch he says any touch spell ranged touch is still touch. Had other GMS allow that upon audit.
Good luck with official answer, as you will need that if you use this in a game and it gets detected.
Ranged touch spells are not touch spells.
|
|
Ranged touch spells are not touch spells.Not to take away from the original question in the thread but since the OP also included this one I'd like to point out again that ranged touch spells are indeed touch spells.
No they're not. Touch spells have a "range" of touch. A la 'Cure X Wounds' or 'Shocking Grasp'. 'Ray of Frost' targets touch AC, but has a range of Ray. 'Acid Splash' has a range of close but targets a touch AC. Just because a spell targets touch AC does not make it a touch spell.
|
A touch spell is one with a range of touch.
A touch attack targets touch AC, and comes in ranged or melee varieties.
The winter witch's ability works with touch spells.
A spell's range indicates how far from you it can reach, as defined in the range entry of the spell description. a spell's range is the maximum distance from you that the spell's effect can occur, as well as the maximum distance at which you can designate the spell's point of origin. If any portion of the spell's area would extend beyond this range, that area is wasted. Standard ranges include the following.
...
Touch
You must touch a creature or object to affect it. A touch spell that deals damage can score a critical hit just as a weapon can. A touch spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit. Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets. You can touch up to 6 willing targets as part of the casting, but all targets of the spell must be touched in the same round that you finish casting the spell. If the spell allows you to touch targets over multiple rounds, touching 6 creatures is a full-round action.
No, the ability is only for touch spells, not ranged touch attacks.
|
|
So help me here. There is a section in the CRB called Touch Spells in Combat. It has a subheader called Ranged Touch Spells in combat.
A touch spell is one with a range of touch.
Is there no such thing as Ranged Touch Spells in combat? Just because there are touch spells with a range of touch doesn't mean they all have to be considering range and a type of spell being cast are two completely different things.
So help me here. There is a section in the CRB called Touch Spells in Combat. It has a subheader called Ranged Touch Spells in combat.
A touch spell is one with a range of touch.Is there no such thing as Ranged Touch Spells in combat? Just because there are touch spells with a range of touch doesn't mean they all have to be considering range and a type of spell being cast are two completely different things.
This is one of many things that are poorly worded in the game. When you have a heavy crossbow being a type of crossbow, why wouldn't you think a ranged touch attack was a type of touch attack? In some context 'touch spell' seems to mean a spell with a range of touch and in others it seems to mean a spell that requires a touch attack. Expect complaints, arguments and general chaos when picking one over the other.
|
This is one of many things that are poorly worded in the game. When you have a heavy crossbow being a type of crossbow, why wouldn't you think a ranged touch attack was a type of touch attack? In some context 'touch spell' seems to mean a spell with a range of touch and in others it seems to mean a spell that requires a touch attack. Expect complaints, arguments and general chaos when picking one over the other.So help me here. There is a section in the CRB called Touch Spells in Combat. It has a subheader called Ranged Touch Spells in combat.
A touch spell is one with a range of touch.Is there no such thing as Ranged Touch Spells in combat? Just because there are touch spells with a range of touch doesn't mean they all have to be considering range and a type of spell being cast are two completely different things.
Tamec is completely right.
To restate it another way, however:
It's better to think of a "touch spell" as not being a category including spells that require melee and ranged touch attacks, but spells that are range of touch.
If they just said a 'spell with range touch' instead of 'touch spell', it would make it easy to understand that's what they mean. Just going with the explanation of touch spell as a spell with a range of touch, it leads to the situation where you can have touch spells that don't use touch attacks* and ranged touch spells not being touch spells. Not exactly intuitive.
* I can't think of any offhand, but I don't think touch range spells have any requirement of touch attacks.
|
|
If they just said a 'spell with range touch' instead of 'touch spell', it would make it easy to understand that's what they mean.
It's because that isn't what they mean.
A classic example is shocking grasp. This is a touch range spell. It says 'Your successful melee touch attack deals' because spells with a range of touch are melee touch attacks. That doesn't mean spells can't make ranged touch attacks.
The problem comes from them naming their range the same as their mechanic.
Frozen Caress (Su) Whenever the winter witch casts a touch spell
This ability doesn't care if the spell has a range of touch. It cares if the spell is a touch spell. They are two very different things.
Ranged touch is a type of spell
touch is a type of spell
while both go against touch AC they aren't the same thing
similar to how
light is a weapon type
one-handed is a weapon type
even though both weapons are wielded with one hand.
This is why the Slashing Grace feat doesn't work for light slashing weapons. This is why the ice witch is only for touch spells and not ranged touch spells.
Spell that are delivered by a melee touch attack are touch spells.
from the combat section table showing what actions take what kind of time
Full-Round Action
Use a touch spell on up to six friends
This shows that touch spells are spells with the range of touch. And spells that make ranged touch attacks aren't counted under "touch spells" since you are not actually touching with them.
|
|
I think you are really getting hung up on the fact that a touch spell can be both a melee touch and a ranged touch. You seem to think that because a spell can use the touch range increment to deliver a melee touch there is no other form of touch spells.
This isn't true. Reading the Touch Spells in Combat section will refer to both types of touch spells.
Touch Attacks: Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively.
Even here we see the distiction between a touch spell and a spell that you make a ranged touch attack with. Also no where in the ranged touch section does it call it a touch spell while it does so specifically in the touch attack section.
ALSO to point out, in the PRD "Touch Spells in Combat:" and "Ranged Touch Spells in Combat:" are bolded while "Touch Attacks:" and "Holding the Charge:" under "Touch Spells:" are italicized. This means that a ranged touch spell is not the same as a touch spell in combat.
no it's a ranged touch spell. Just like a dagger, a light weapon, while wielded in one hand is not a one-handed weapon. You can't just break it up saying it is a "ranged" "touch spell" for that is not what it is. It is a "ranged touch spell" which IS different than a "touch spell". Sorry you don't like it, but that's how it is.
Also about the provoking it says that attacking with a touch spell does not provoke an attack of opportunity, but under ranged Touch Spells it says that these attacks do provoke, thus further emphasizing that they are different.
|
|
Ray of frost does not count as a touch spell. Otherwise a magus would cast it every round for a spellstrike.They really wouldn't.
he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack. Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell
That was my point, I just had to point that out to a player who was trying to add acid splash to every sword swing.
I'm not sure about a consensus but I'm pretty sure it counts as lighter armor for enchantments. I feel this way because I see nothing in the Mithral description saying that it shouldn't be light for enchantments since it is a limit based on the type of armor which I feel clearly falls under the "other limitation" part. The only thing not changed for mithral armor is the proficiency needed.
Edit:
Heavy armors are treated as medium, and medium armors are treated as light, but light armors are still treated as light. This decrease does not apply to proficiency in wearing the armor."
the Heavy armor is treated as medium and medium as light. Brawling can only be on light. Thus brawling can be on mithral medium as it is treated as light. The only thing not treated as light is the proficiency, this is the exception and that's why it's specifically mentioned.
Most mithral armors are one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations. Heavy armors are treated as medium, and medium armors are treated as light, but light armors are still treated as light.
The line I left out and you added doesn't change any of the meaning of the lines I did include. And I mentioned the "other limitations" in the part above. I'm not trying to selectively choose words that when twisted says what I want it to. I just didn't feel that adding the first line you did gave anything useful purpose to the discussion, as no where in that line does it say that limitation tied to the armors type don't change. Thus my point is that it's everything and they had to state the exception for proficiency.