Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game

Starfinder


Pathfinder Society


Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

PFS Gear Upgrading Clarity:


Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild

51 to 83 of 83 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Lune wrote:

Slim Jim: You might think that. But then you'd be wrong.

Just further upthread, The Only Star wrote:
Isn't Celestial Armor made of bright silver or gold?

Later Lau Bannenberg actually backed him up saying:

Lau Bannenberg wrote:

The CRB version is made of silver or gold. If you had silver or gold chainmail you could enchant it into CRB celestial armor. Note that you can't actually make armor out of silver normally, so you could only do this with gold armor.

The UE version doesn't list any special material so it would have to be made of steel. You could upgrade a steel chainmal into celestial armor.

The dwarves controlling the mithral production monopoly are not going to be happy with this development.

"Ordinary steel made better than mithral!? What devilry are these elves up to now? What sinister scheme are they at? It's ridiculous! Unthinkable! ...How long do you wear it before the curse kicks in? I'll bet it renders you sterile, or something else you wouldn't notice right away...."


"Next thing you hear GOLD will be harder, lighter and better than steel. Why even use Mithral anymore when to think we coulda been using all that worthless gold we have been throwing out for decades!" *shaking head* "Gold... made lighter than steel! Had to be an elf!"


So Mike brock didnt bother to read all the rules for a campaign clarifaction he made?

Shadow Lodge *****

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Halek wrote:
So Mike brock didnt bother to read all the rules for a campaign clarifaction he made?

His crystal ball for peering into the future and seeing what the item description would be was out on loan to a vigilante in Champion city.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Halek wrote:
So Mike brock didnt bother to read all the rules for a campaign clarifaction he made?

His crystal ball for peering into the future and seeing what the item description would be was out on loan to a vigilante in Champion city.

His post came after ultimate equipment. The other kind of celestial armor was already in existence. No future sight needed.


Lune wrote:

Found it. That post (Jan 26, 2013) was before the FAQ update (Mar 13, 2017) but after the first printing of Ultimate Equipment (August 2012).

That leaves his ruling relevant under the old FAQ and now in the territory of needing a fresh ruling. My question stands.

This poster already showed that Mike Brock didnt bother to read all the rules that were out at the time. No crystal ball just shoddy work on his part.

Shadow Lodge *****

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Halek wrote:


This poster already showed that Mike Brock didnt bother to read all the rules that were out at the time. No crystal ball just shoddy work on his part.

Right, because if you don't look at EVERYTHING being published to store it in you eidetic memory, anything less than that is "shoddy"...

Your expectations of PFS are awfully high from someone that doesn't even play PFS.


Well no but searching for all the rules for a specific armor when asked about it isnt hard. I dont expect him to store every rule but I do expect him to have access to the books so he can look these things up.

I just expect when asked a specific question that he will look at the rules pertaining to that question. I dont expect anyone to memorize the rules but when asked hey can i do this? And the thing has two different versions not reading one is shoddy work. And it is work for him.

I expect the basic level of effort of reading the rules. Is that wrong?

Shadow Lodge *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Halek wrote:

Well no but searching for all the rules for a specific armor when asked about it isnt hard. I dont expect him to store every rule but I do expect him to have access to the books so he can look these things up.

I just expect when asked a specific question that he will look at the rules pertaining to that question. I dont expect anyone to memorize the rules but when asked hey can i do this? And the thing has two different versions not reading one is shoddy work. And it is work for him.

I expect the basic level of effort of reading the rules. Is that wrong?

For a game, picking up the closest book, reading it, and making a decision over that is enough due diligence. Or more likely as it wasn't added to the SRD yet, doing that google thing, seeing the old version of the item and basing a decision on that , also enough due diligence. That there's a newer version (which you may or may not want to use as the official version) isn't readily obvious just from looking at the older version.

It's a game. Not heart medications. Chill.

Scarab Sages *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The new book just came out. Has thousands of items in it. It isn't on the PRD yet. And he's supposed to just magically know that the book includes a new version of an existing item?

Is your expectation, "Hey, here's a question. Let me look through this new book to make sure this item from the core rulebook hasn't been reprinted."

That's a Collosal waste of time. I don't think anyone really knew the reprint had new text until a couple years later.

Sczarni *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I believe his ruling took place between the first and second printings.

The first printing had the original "silver and gold" description.

The second printing has the current, no-material-listed description.

So he was operating off of what he had.

Like Bignorsewolf stated earlier, Mike Brock's crystal ball was being serviced at the time.


Nefreet wrote:

I believe his ruling took place between the first and second printings.

The first printing had the original "silver and gold" description.

The second printing has the current, no-material-listed description.

So he was operating off of what he had.

Like Bignorsewolf stated earlier, Mike Brock's crystal ball was being serviced at the time.

I am not seeing this change in the errata document. Not saying you are wrong. I just dont see it.

*** Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo aka Chess Pwn

Halek wrote:
Nefreet wrote:

I believe his ruling took place between the first and second printings.

The first printing had the original "silver and gold" description.

The second printing has the current, no-material-listed description.

So he was operating off of what he had.

Like Bignorsewolf stated earlier, Mike Brock's crystal ball was being serviced at the time.

I am not seeing this change in the errata document. Not saying you are wrong. I just dont see it.

If you had read this thread you'd see that there are two books being talked about. The first printing was in one book and the second printing was in a later book.

Sovereign Court *** Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden aka Ascalaphus

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Is it really useful to go about casting aspersions about how Mike did or did not read something in a particular printing of UE five years ago when half the people in the discussion weren't active in PFS yet?

So he made a ruling that, with the rest of printed material we have now, isn't really accurate anymore. Ask for it to be updated, that's useful. Trying to pin the blame on someone who doesn't hold the job anymore, that's only going to sour a discussion.


Halek wrote:
Lune wrote:

Found it. That post (Jan 26, 2013) was before the FAQ update (Mar 13, 2017) but after the first printing of Ultimate Equipment (August 2012).

That leaves his ruling relevant under the old FAQ and now in the territory of needing a fresh ruling. My question stands.

This poster already showed that Mike Brock didnt bother to read all the rules that were out at the time. No crystal ball just shoddy work on his part.

What? No. That isn't what that means at all.

What it means is that his ruling at the time was accurate. Mike posted after the change in what Celestial Armor was made of but before what it was made of mattered for the purpose of PFS. Before there were upgrade rules that would allow for an upgrade path. Now that the PFS rules have changed his original statement seems no longer applicable in the current PFS FAQ rules.

To put this in chronological order:
1. Rules existed for Celestial Armor but not for the current upgrade paths that the PFS FAQ has now.
2. Rules changed for Celestial Armor that removed what it was made of.
3. Mike made a ruling on there not being an upgrade path for Celestial Armor in PFS.
4. The rules for PFS changed and now allow upgrade paths into unique items if they are made of the same material.

Nothing was missed. Mike did a fine job. His previous ruling is just no longer relevant under the current PFS FAQ. At the very least it needs a new ruling if it is no longer intended to be allowable. Otherwise, under the current rules you can upgrade +3 Chainmail into Celestial Armor as it meets all of the guidelines put for. It is possible that it is meant to be an exception to that rule, however, without anything stating that it is an exception it follows the same rules as everything else.

The only reason that I posted the above quoted part was because BNW was stating that his the reason and rationale for no upgrade path for Celestial Armor is still relevant. He also stated that that "the best available evidence is that the armor doesn't have a PFS upgrade path", which isn't true for the most up to date rules considering the chronology of the events. It was also in response to Thomas Hutchins stating that all statements by PDT are official and legal until overturned. While mostly true it doesn't encompass the situation of rules changing and affecting things under them like the situation we have here with the addition to the PFS FAQ and Celestial Armor changing it's material.

Liberty's Edge *

Because of how specific Mike Brock's ruling is I don't believe it has been overturned by the upgrade rule.

So, I for one, would like to have current leadership clarify/overturn this specific item.

Liberty's Edge ** Venture-Agent, Utah—Logan aka ShieldLawrence

Gary Bush wrote:

Because of how specific Mike Brock's ruling is I don't believe it has been overturned by the upgrade rule.

So, I for one, would like to have current leadership clarify/overturn this specific item.

I don’t think specificity really plays into whether something is overturned or outdated.

I think Lune did a really good job laying it out.

Liberty's Edge *

I don't disagree. Just need John to agree.


So, Gary: Out of curiosity without Mike's ruling and judging on only the revised FAQ rules and the revised Celestial Armor rules do you believe that there is an upgrade path to it?

Liberty's Edge *

Yes for the UE version only.


Alternatively, we could propose fixing the armor, which hasn't been changed appreciably since 3rd edition.

Suggested new text: "This bright silver or gold-colored mithral +3 chainmail..."

Liberty's Edge *

As pointed out up thread, the description changed in a revision of Ultimate Equipment that I agree would allow for an upgrade path but for a Mike Brock ruling that says there is no upgrade path for the armor in PFS.

As I read the description in UE, the base armor is chainmail. Not mithral chainmail. So any upgrade, as I see it, would start with "normal" steel chainmail and the process that makes it Celestial Armor transforms into something that is very similar to mithral but is not mithral.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

...it would also raise the cost by 4000 gold, because it has mithral in it.

Shadow Lodge **

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
...it would also raise the cost by 4000 gold, because it has mithral in it.

That would assume that the price for it being mithral isn't already accounted for in the 22,400gp price tag.

Assuming the price includes mithral:
Chainmail: 150gp
Mithral: 4,000gp
+3: 9,000gp
Unknown split between increasing Max Dex by 4, reducing arcane spell failure by 5%, and once per day fly: 9,250gp

Assuming it doesn't:
Chainmail: 150gp
Masterwork: 150gp
+3: 9,000gp
Unknown split between increasing Max Dex by 6, reducing armor check penalty by 2, reducing arcane spell failure by 15%, and once per day fly: 13,100gp

I think the "mithral included" price is a fair breakdown, and considering the original description, may have been intended.


I agree with SCPRedMage. Especially because of the weight of the item which is 20lbs as opposed to 40lbs which is what Chainmail normally weighs.

Actually, to take it a step beyond I think it doesn't matter if it is Mithral or Steel. The rules state that it has to be made of the same material. There is nothing saying that Celestial Armor is made of steel anymore than there is anything saying that it is made of Mithral. As SCPRedMage pointed out the properties of the item could just as easily be due to it's Mithral composition as it could be due to it's magical enhancement.

At this point the intention argument is moot as this item has existed for several editions and no one on the current team could possibly know the original intentions of the item. However, they might be able to weigh in on the intention behind removing part of the item's description.

However, outside of getting input from leadership we are all stuck between RAW saying that it works and an outdated statement by leadership saying that it didn't under a rules system that is no longer in use. Personally, between the two the newer ruling seems more valid but I'm open minded enough to entertain other view points.

Liberty's Edge *

Lune I agree with you that the newer rules makes more sense given the current state of the campaign. I wouldn't say valid however because of Mike's ruling. Yes it is likely outdated. But it still stands. Until an updated ruling is provided, we have to follow it.

As for the cost including mithral or not, it really does not matter because the final cost would be the same. The question still remains if a special material is intended. The UE description does not say mithral. This causes a problem with the "similar material" test. That is why I don't think mithral is part of the upgraded.


"more valid". Distinct difference. ;)

An updated ruling was provided. The PFS FAQ.

If the UE description not saying "Mithral" causes a problem then it causes the same problem for steel as it doesn't say "steel" either. The point is that it doesn't say what it is made out of one way or the other. To assume one material is just as valid as the other but it is an assumption either way.

The Exchange *****

Lune wrote:

"more valid". Distinct difference. ;)

An updated ruling was provided. The PFS FAQ.

If the UE description not saying "Mithral" causes a problem then it causes the same problem for steel as it doesn't say "steel" either. The point is that it doesn't say what it is made out of one way or the other. To assume one material is just as valid as the other but it is an assumption either way.

Look at it from a slightly different angle. If a creature had a sunder like effect on it's attack, what hardness would you use? Unless a special material is listed in the item description the armor would use the default base hardness 10 of steel plus the enhancement modifier. Using the base hardness 15 of mithral would be adding abilities that the armor doesn't normally have.

Liberty's Edge *

Lune wrote:

"more valid". Distinct difference. ;)

An updated ruling was provided. The PFS FAQ.

If the UE description not saying "Mithral" causes a problem then it causes the same problem for steel as it doesn't say "steel" either. The point is that it doesn't say what it is made out of one way or the other. To assume one material is just as valid as the other but it is an assumption either way.

You are I are going to disagree on this Lune. And that's fine. I don't believe the most recent PFS FAQ, a general guideline on how upgrades work, is specific enough to overturn a VERY specific ruling.

And Mithral is a special material and called out as such while steel is the basic material something metal is made of unless otherwise specified.

You want the item, and frankly so do I, but we have to follow the rules until the rules are changed.

Anyways, campaign leadership will respond. Or they will not. Until they do there will table variance.

*** Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo aka Chess Pwn

so question about this. Does this rule let us upgrade a metamagic rod lesser to the normal version?


Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


...it would also raise the cost by 4000 gold, because it has mithral in it.

For what it does, it'd still be underpriced.

Liberty's Edge *

Thomas Hutchins wrote:
so question about this. Does this rule let us upgrade a metamagic rod lesser to the normal version?

It is my understanding that yes, it gives a path to upgrade lessor to greater items.

Shadow Lodge **

Thomas Hutchins wrote:
so question about this. Does this rule let us upgrade a metamagic rod lesser to the normal version?

Normal and greater metamagic rods are physically identical, use the same "slot" (hand-held), and can do everything the lesser versions do (i.e., be used on spells of the same spell levels).

There's no reason to think that you couldn't.

51 to 83 of 83 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild / PFS Gear Upgrading Clarity: All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.