"2 Questions for the price of one" (+3 Robe?) and (Ability Focus?)


Rules Questions

Dark Archive

Okay, my question doesn't necessarily have to be a +3, but i was wondering if there where any rules against enchanting a robe like armor. This way, a wizards AC doesn't such without having to boost yourself with spells.

Example
Lv 5 Wizards gets a +1 Robe (+0 base Ac, no max dex, -0 ACP, 0% ASF)
So, he could have a AC of say 14 (+1 robe, +2 dex, +1 dodge)?

Thoughts?

Another Question
Could a player take the Ability Focus feat to improve say stunning fist DC, or assassin death attack DC? As a GM, a player in my current game is a monk assassin and wants to know if this is possible. I have ruled that it is okay for death attack as i see that qualifying as a special ability, but stunning fist? I'm not sure.

Thoughts?

Feel free to answer either or both questions and thanks in advance.

Grand Lodge

1) I had a very similar conversation for Star Wars and would give the same response. An enhancement bonus increases the game property that an item has. Normal clothing doesn't have an armour bonus (it's not Base AC +0, it's AC -) and therefore an enhancement to its armour bonus does nothing.

2) The question is whether stunning fist or death attack is a special attack for purposes of the prerequisites of Ability Focus. Since Stunning Fist is a feat, it would be listed in a monster stat block under Feats, not under Special Attacks. Most likely death attack would be listed as a special attack. Unfortunately none of the creatures in the Bestiary seem to have monk or assassin levels to check.


There's nothing stopping you from enchanting robes to act like armor. Just determine what type of armor bonus you want and price accordingly.

In 3.5 I think you could take Ability Focus for either of the attacks you mention; not sure about Pathfinder however.

Edit: I was specifically referring to having robes that act like bracers of armor (armor bonus to AC), or perhaps grant a deflection bonus (like a ring of protection), or even maybe duplicate the effects of an amulet of natural armor. Other options are possible.

Grand Lodge

Lathiira wrote:
Edit: I was specifically referring to having robes that act like bracers of armor (armor bonus to AC), or perhaps grant a deflection bonus (like a ring of protection), or even maybe duplicate the effects of an amulet of natural armor. Other options are possible.

Sure, no particular problem with those. They would be non-standard wondrous items so the DM would have to assign their cost, creation requirements and so on. A designer might decide to charge more because they use a relatively rare slot.


Starglim wrote:
Lathiira wrote:
Edit: I was specifically referring to having robes that act like bracers of armor (armor bonus to AC), or perhaps grant a deflection bonus (like a ring of protection), or even maybe duplicate the effects of an amulet of natural armor. Other options are possible.
Sure, no particular problem with those. They would be non-standard wondrous items so the DM would have to assign their cost, creation requirements and so on. A designer might decide to charge more because they use a relatively rare slot.

Price shouldn't be hard to calculate other than the price adjustment the GM might throw at you for that nonstandard item slot, but I have seen robes give bonuses to AC before so I don't think there's much call for it. YMMV, of course. As it is, robes of the archmagi give an armor bonus (unless I missed that change).

Dark Archive

Thanx

That was a faster response than i was expecting. That really helped.
So, i'm thinking

Robe of Defense (name?)
Cost: +1 deflection AC, 3,000 gp (1.5 x ring of protection); +2 deflection AC, 6,000 gp, etc, etc, etc.


DragonBringerX wrote:

Thanx

That was a faster response than i was expecting. That really helped.
So, i'm thinking

Robe of Defense (name?)
Cost: +1 deflection AC, 3,000 gp (1.5 x ring of protection); +2 deflection AC, 6,000 gp, etc, etc, etc.

Try looking up the market values for the ring of protection:

ring +1: 2000
ring +2: 8000
ring +3: 18000
ring +4: 32000
ring +5: 50000

Now that I look at them (all derived from the table formula for deflection bonuses to AC), those would be reasonable to me for the price of robes. I'd also look at bracers of armor and the amulet of natural armor.

Dark Archive

Lathiira wrote:
DragonBringerX wrote:

Thanx

That was a faster response than i was expecting. That really helped.
So, i'm thinking

Robe of Defense (name?)
Cost: +1 deflection AC, 3,000 gp (1.5 x ring of protection); +2 deflection AC, 6,000 gp, etc, etc, etc.

Try looking up the market values for the ring of protection:

ring +1: 2000
ring +2: 8000
ring +3: 18000
ring +4: 32000
ring +5: 50000

Now that I look at them (all derived from the table formula for deflection bonuses to AC), those would be reasonable to me for the price of robes. I'd also look at bracers of armor and the amulet of natural armor.

so...

robe +1: 2000 gp
robe +2: 8000 gp
robe +3: 18000 gp
robe +4: 32000 gp
robe +5: 50000 gp


I don't see the problem with enchanting a set of robes/tunic/dress with an ENHANCEMENT bonus to AC. After all, Magic Vestment does this and clearly states to treat normal clothing as AC +0.

You guys are simply making a ring of protection that fills a different item slot, and that's largely redundant.


Sean FitzSimon wrote:

I don't see the problem with enchanting a set of robes/tunic/dress with an ENHANCEMENT bonus to AC. After all, Magic Vestment does this and clearly states to treat normal clothing as AC +0.

You guys are simply making a ring of protection that fills a different item slot, and that's largely redundant.

This is how the Dungeon Master's Guide and Magic Item Compendium did it in 3.5e though. There aren't +3 robes or +3 clothing in the sense of +3 leather or +3 fullplate. There ARE examples of robes you can find that function the same way as bracers of armor though.

The entire reason Magic Vestment specifies that you should treat normal clothing as AC +0 when it receives the magic of the spell is because that's an exception to the standard practice, not because it is the standard practice.


Wolf Munroe wrote:
Sean FitzSimon wrote:

I don't see the problem with enchanting a set of robes/tunic/dress with an ENHANCEMENT bonus to AC. After all, Magic Vestment does this and clearly states to treat normal clothing as AC +0.

You guys are simply making a ring of protection that fills a different item slot, and that's largely redundant.

This is how the Dungeon Master's Guide and Magic Item Compendium did it in 3.5e though. There aren't +3 robes or +3 clothing in the sense of +3 leather or +3 fullplate. There ARE examples of robes you can find that function the same way as bracers of armor though.

The entire reason Magic Vestment specifies that you should treat normal clothing as AC +0 when it receives the magic of the spell is because that's an exception to the standard practice, not because it is the standard practice.

I can see doing it as bracers of armor with the bonus being straight up AC. It would prevent monks/mages from getting both the bracers and +5 robes. Plus, any clothie who befriends a cleric could have +5 Robes of Armor (8).

Fun, fun.


Sean FitzSimon wrote:

I don't see the problem with enchanting a set of robes/tunic/dress with an ENHANCEMENT bonus to AC. After all, Magic Vestment does this and clearly states to treat normal clothing as AC +0.

You guys are simply making a ring of protection that fills a different item slot, and that's largely redundant.

I dissagree. By making it nonstandard, it becomes unique. One of the big 3.5 magic problems pathfinder has inherited is the inherrant blandness of magic items (as well as their necessary ubiquity).

The Abjurer's robe (+1 deflection bonus) is fine by me (and it's much more...flamable than a ring of deflection anyway)

Likewise a masterwork club that functions as a wand (so... it's a weapons that is magical but not a magical weapon)

Pipe tobacco built with brew potion, Scrolls etched into the surface of a flat swordblade, a wand of prestidigitation that looks like a witches broom, an amulet forged into the shape of flute.... variety is the spice of life.

batts

The Exchange

Iczer wrote:
Sean FitzSimon wrote:

I don't see the problem with enchanting a set of robes/tunic/dress with an ENHANCEMENT bonus to AC. After all, Magic Vestment does this and clearly states to treat normal clothing as AC +0.

You guys are simply making a ring of protection that fills a different item slot, and that's largely redundant.

I dissagree. By making it nonstandard, it becomes unique. One of the big 3.5 magic problems pathfinder has inherited is the inherrant blandness of magic items (as well as their necessary ubiquity).

The Abjurer's robe (+1 deflection bonus) is fine by me (and it's much more...flamable than a ring of deflection anyway)

Likewise a masterwork club that functions as a wand (so... it's a weapons that is magical but not a magical weapon)

Pipe tobacco built with brew potion, Scrolls etched into the surface of a flat swordblade, a wand of prestidigitation that looks like a witches broom, an amulet forged into the shape of flute.... variety is the spice of life.

batts

This is something I try to keep in mind when designing treasure. Plus it allows PC's to keep some low level but valued rings, etc. A monk with say bracers of archery, could still have a tunic of armor. The Snakeskin Tunic (pg54, Skinsaw Murders), is a great example of a non-standard magic item. Our druid considers it to be her most valuable item, and has increased the armor bonus as she has increased in level.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

DragonBringerX wrote:

enchanting a robe like armor.

Could a player take the Ability Focus feat to improve say stunning fist DC

Ask your DM for a custom Bracer of Armour on the Vest slot for the same cost. He may allow it at the same cost, at 50% more, or may not allow it at all.

Ability Focus is allowed by RAW, but your DM may allow it or block it.


I think a +2 robe should be priced and act the same as a bracers of armor +2. A torso/vest slot is native for protective enhancement so no need to price it more. If you can have bracers of armor, you can have a robe of armor. Seems intuitive to me.


Why not price it just like armor, taking a body slot and giving an armor bonus? Base price for the item is still masterwork (outfit cost + 150) and you add the appropriate enchantment.

So a Garment +1 is 1000 + 150 + 1sp (cost of the outfit).

The MW price may not be exactly that, but something similar should work.


If you stay with the rules as written you can not put a magic armor bonus on regular clothing items like a robe. There was a lengthy thread about that back in Beta but I can't find it and have no time to quote the necessary rules.
The gist of it is that only masterwork armor (listed on the Table: Armor and Shields) is eligible for an armor enhancement bonus. Spells like Magic Vestment have a special Paragraph so that the enhancement bonus can also be applied to regular clothing like a robe.
That said, you could probably make an Robe of Armor instead of Bracers, but it would count as an wondrous item.


Another Question
Could a player take the Ability Focus feat to improve say stunning fist DC, or assassin death attack DC? As a GM, a player in my current game is a monk assassin and wants to know if this is possible. I have ruled that it is okay for death attack as i see that qualifying as a special ability, but stunning fist? I'm not sure.

Thoughts?

Feel free to answer either or both questions and thanks in advance.

If you have access to the Game Mastery Guide, there are 3 listings of Monks on page 274-275. All 3 of them have Stunning Fist as a listing under the "Special Attacks" heading. keep this in mind.

Now i direct your attention to the Beastiary page 314, where we find the Ability Focus feat.
Prerequisite: Special Attack
Benefit: Choose one of the creature's special attacks. Add +2 to the DC for all saving throws against the special attack on which the creature focuses.
Special: A creature can gain this feat multiple times. its effects do not stack. Each time the creature takes the feat, it applies to a different special attack.

So taking these two examples, Pathfinder does inherently allow Stunning Fist (as well as Quivering Palm) to be modified by this feat.


Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Given that bracers of armors exist and crafting them costs exactly the same as enchanting a robe with the same bonus would cost, and that both would provide exactly the same bonus, there's really no point for this. Unless you really, really need the bracers slot for something else.


Ah, if you don't mind forgoing the classic 'enrobe-ed' wizard look, there's always the armored kilt from AA. Worn all by itself, it gives you an armor bonus right there. Enchant as normal.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder RPG / Rules Questions / "2 Questions for the price of one" (+3 Robe?) and (Ability Focus?) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.