Is this possible or am I being a tool?

[Hughes Crawford 75]

Working on a Character idea. I know that Mage Armor doesn't stack with Regular Armor, but can you use it simply to get the +4 on incorporeal attacks?
Like say you were wearing a suit of Armor, but cast Mage Armor before going up against an incorporeal creature. So that your regular armor would protect you from other threats, but the Mage Armor would protect you from the incorporeal one.

[Rysky]

I would say so.

[MeanMutton]

Hughes Crawford 75 wrote:

Working on a Character idea. I know that Mage Armor doesn't stack witj Regular Armor, but can you use it simply to get the +4 on incoporal attacks?

They overlap so yep. It would still be fully effective against incorporeal attacks whereas your standard armor wouldn't be.

[Pizza Lord]

Yes. If you have a chain shirt and cast mage armor then nothing technically changes AC-wise, but the mage armor would come into effect for purposes of attacks that are affected by force effects, like incorporeal attacks.

It's not a bad idea, other than having any Armor Check penalties or spell failure chances for also wearing actual armor.

[Imbicatus]

The effects overlap, but expect table variation on if the incorporeal ac applies.

The guideline on stacking armor effects is set by the armored coat: "The only magic effects that apply are those of armor, clothing, or items worn on top."

If you are weapon armor over the mage armor effect, it can be ruled that all aspects of the spell shut down as long as it's worn. Personally, I'd allow it, but I can think of a few GMs that wouldn't.

[Pizza Lord]

Imbicatus wrote:

The guideline on stacking armor effects is set by the armored coat: "The only magic effects that apply are those of armor, clothing, or items worn on top."

Mage armor is not worn armor. It does not take up an armor slot, or a chest slot, or a shirt slot. Armored coat's ruling is clearly for layering actual pieces of equipment that count as armor.

If you have a set of celestial armor and cast mage armor (which according to the spell surrounds you with tangible force, ie. it would clearly be over your armor and clothes) you will still have the higher AC from the celestial armor (+3 chainmail), as well as its armor check penalties, spell failure chance, max Dex of +8, etc. and against incorporeal attacks you will have a +4 AC bonus from mage armor (the celestial armor will add nothing.) You will also be able to use the fly power of the celestial armor or any other benefits of magical armor, like energy resistance or fortification while mage armor is in effect.

[James Risner]

Rysky wrote:

I would say so.

+1

They overlap normally and the spell would work when armor wouldn't for incorporeal.

[hasteroth]

Yeah, same type bonuses don't stack, meaning you apply the highest bonus only. But that does not mean that either bonus is cancelled out by the higher one, both apply entirely... they just overlap.

Armored Coat essentially cancels out worn armor bonuses that are on the armor which the Armored Coat is covering. Since Mage Armor does not take up any sort of armor slot, is neither on top of nor below any worn armor... the Armored Coat's rule does not apply.

[Philo Pharynx]

We've always played it that way. In fact, many parties I've been in have chipped in for a mage armor wand when we thought incorporeal undead would be an issue.

[pauljathome]

Imbicatus wrote:

The effects overlap, but expect table variation on if the incorporeal ac applies.

I've taken advantage of this quite a few times in PFS and never had a GM say no. I never thought that it was remotely an issue