Is it possible to wear Xanesha's Tunic under Armor?
From the AP's description of the tunic:
"A snakeskin tunic is a tight, form-fitting shirt crafted from
the scales of a giant snake. When worn, it grants a +1
armor bonus to your AC, a +2 enhancement bonus to your
Dexterity, and a +2 resistance bonus on saving throws
against poison."
so, if the amor isn't magical, wouldn't it be okay to wear the tunic under it?
(my group killed Xanesha yesterday, so now they're planning what to do with the loot...)
thanks for your thoughts,
GRU
Is it possible to wear Xanesha's Tunic under Armor?
From the AP's description of the tunic:
"A snakeskin tunic is a tight, form-fitting shirt crafted from
the scales of a giant snake. When worn, it grants a +1
armor bonus to your AC, a +2 enhancement bonus to your
Dexterity, and a +2 resistance bonus on saving throws
against poison."so, if the amor isn't magical, wouldn't it be okay to wear the tunic under it?
(my group killed Xanesha yesterday, so now they're planning what to do with the loot...)
thanks for your thoughts,
GRU
This item is listed as taking the Torso slot, which is separate from the Armor slot. If in PRPG, however, there is an Armor slot and a Body slot. I would play conservative and say the tunic takes up the Body slot.
Thanks, Turin.
GRU
Even if the armor was magical, would a wearer still get the Dexterity enhancement and the Poison Save bonus?
Even if the armor was magical, would a wearer still get the Dexterity enhancement and the Poison Save bonus?
Different item slots and bonus types are of concern. The magical armor doesn't shut the entire tunic down - it provides a higher armor bonus. Same thing with mundane leather armor (or greater) providing better than the +1 armor bonus.
Does that answer your question Lord Fyre?
Even if the armor was magical, would a wearer still get the Dexterity enhancement and the Poison Save bonus?Different item slots and bonus types are of concern. The magical armor doesn't shut the entire tunic down - it provides a higher armor bonus. Same thing with mundane leather armor (or greater) providing better than the +1 armor bonus.
Does that answer your question Lord Fyre?
It does, and that was my understanding.
But, the way the OP phased the question "so, if the amor isn't magical, wouldn't it be okay to wear the tunic under it?" made me wonder if I was misinterpreting the stacking rules.
Even if the armor was magical, would a wearer still get the Dexterity enhancement and the Poison Save bonus?Different item slots and bonus types are of concern. The magical armor doesn't shut the entire tunic down - it provides a higher armor bonus. Same thing with mundane leather armor (or greater) providing better than the +1 armor bonus.
Does that answer your question Lord Fyre?
It does, and that was my understanding.
But, the way the OP phased the question "so, if the amor isn't magical, wouldn't it be okay to wear the tunic under it?" made me wonder if I was misinterpreting the stacking rules.
^_^ Nah, although I can recall when it used to be that it would or could, either rules- or campaign-dependent.
Depending on how nasty you want to get, you could always say that because the tunic is "a tight, form-fitting shirt" only female characters can wear it, and only those that have Xanesha's proportions. If anyone else wants to wear it they'll have to have it altered. Also, if you're playing the AP using 3.5 rules the shirt would technically be considered Large-sized, so most characters couldn't wear it anyway. In fact, all of Xanesha's items would be Large-sized and unusable by most PCs.
Depending on how nasty you want to get, you could always say that because the tunic is "a tight, form-fitting shirt" only female characters can wear it, and only those that have Xanesha's proportions. If anyone else wants to wear it they'll have to have it altered. Also, if you're playing the AP using 3.5 rules the shirt would technically be considered Large-sized, so most characters couldn't wear it anyway. In fact, all of Xanesha's items would be Large-sized and unusable by most PCs.
Magic items worn on the body resize themselves to fit their new wearers. That's why, in, for instance... places like Korvosa or Riddleport that have a 2% halfling or gnome population, when you play halfling or gnome, the DM doesn't make you roll percentile (aiming for below 03 on 1-100) to see if you can find a magic ring that would fit your tiny fingers, or a magic belt sized to fit your tiny waist.
Well, I mean, you could do that if you really wanted to be "simulationist" about D&D but that's just bonkers.
|
Ok so the tunic has caused a small fight to break out in my home game. And no matter how I've ruled no one likes the answer and I've been asked to seek outside help.
Can a monk wear the snakeskin tunic and gain the benifits of it (+1 AC, +2 Dex... etc.) and still keep their monk bonuses. Initial ruling was and is no. The tunic counts as armor and monks looses his abilites.
Of course the players involved say it it isn't armor, but a shirt. And since shirts are not armor, or even listed in the handbook, there is no penalty.
|
Ok so the tunic has caused a small fight to break out in my home game. And no matter how I've ruled no one likes the answer and I've been asked to seek outside help.
Can a monk wear the snakeskin tunic and gain the benifits of it (+1 AC, +2 Dex... etc.) and still keep their monk bonuses. Initial ruling was and is no. The tunic counts as armor and monks looses his abilites.
Of course the players involved say it it isn't armor, but a shirt. And since shirts are not armor, or even listed in the handbook, there is no penalty.
You're the DM and are therefore right, but I'd personally rule it wasn't armour if this came up. I'd also allow wizards and sorcerers to wear it without penalties for the same reason.
|
|
You're the DM and are therefore right, but I'd personally rule it wasn't armour if this came up. I'd also allow wizards and sorcerers to wear it without penalties for the same reason.Ok so the tunic has caused a small fight to break out in my home game. And no matter how I've ruled no one likes the answer and I've been asked to seek outside help.
Can a monk wear the snakeskin tunic and gain the benifits of it (+1 AC, +2 Dex... etc.) and still keep their monk bonuses. Initial ruling was and is no. The tunic counts as armor and monks looses his abilites.
Of course the players involved say it it isn't armor, but a shirt. And since shirts are not armor, or even listed in the handbook, there is no penalty.
I would side with your players as well. There is precedent for non-armour items carrying an armour bonus, including the Robe of the Archmagi and bracers of armour. Note that the tunic would not stack with either of those items.
To your original question about wearing it under armour, I would say that you can but because the armour bonuses don't stack, there isn't much point and a mage or a monk would get much more benefit out of it.
Ok so the tunic has caused a small fight to break out in my home game. And no matter how I've ruled no one likes the answer and I've been asked to seek outside help.
Can a monk wear the snakeskin tunic and gain the benifits of it (+1 AC, +2 Dex... etc.) and still keep their monk bonuses. Initial ruling was and is no. The tunic counts as armor and monks looses his abilites.
Of course the players involved say it it isn't armor, but a shirt. And since shirts are not armor, or even listed in the handbook, there is no penalty.
Providing an armor bonus =/= armor. A Mage Armor spell provides an armor bonus, but it is not armor. Bracers of armor provide an armor bonus, but they are not armor. Most of the reason for items like this are to provide an AC boost to low-AC characters who cannot wear traditional armor (like Wizards or Monks).
Not only can a monk be able to wear an item like this, it's one of the few items found as "loot" in a traditional adventure where that's even an option. Monks seldom have UMD, so wands and such are out. Monks are non proficient with most conventional weapons, and lose their ability to flurry with all but a tiny few. Armor is straight out. Stuff that provides a magical armor bonus is a monks best pal in a treasure hoard.
All classes can wear the tunic without problem. It is a shirt and therefore takes op the "chest slot" it is neither an armor or a body slot item.
Being a shirt it does not hinder or encumber in any way and does not caouse spell failure or loss af any class or racial abilities. This is a good item for arcane casters and monks. Remember that Xanesha herself is a sorceress.
A shirt can be worn underneath any armor. The tunic's armor bonus, as stated by someone else, does not stack with armor bonuses from armor and would in such a case only confer its Dex bonus and its bonus to poison saves.
Also, if you're playing the AP using 3.5 rules the shirt would technically be considered Large-sized, so most characters couldn't wear it anyway. In fact, all of Xanesha's items would be Large-sized and unusable by most PCs.
Wait, has that changed in Pathfinder? Do magic armor and weapons now suddenly resize to different size categories?
(items that weren't armor or weapons resized to fit the new wearer also in 3.5, though)
Size and Magic ItemsWhen an article of magic clothing or jewelry is discovered, most of the time size shouldn’t be an issue. Many magic garments are made to be easily adjustable, or they adjust themselves magically to the wearer. Size should not keep characters of various kinds from using magic items. There may be rare exceptions, especially with race-specific items.
Armor and Weapon Sizes: Armor and weapons that are found at random have a 30% chance of being Small (01–30), a 60% chance of being Medium (31–90), and a 10% chance of being any other size (91–100).
According to RAW, /most/ magic clothing and jewelry resize. Armor and weapons do not.
In 3.5 that is.
I was quoting that part directly out of the Pathfinder Corebook. Which is same as 3.5, i believe.
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
I don't think the stuff Xanesha is wearing/using is large size, is it? *She's* large size because of her giant snake body, but her upper body is just normal size, I think. I could be wrong, and remembering that from somewhere/something else, but I'm pretty sure...
Regardless, Ravenot is right: you can find it on page 459 of the PFRPG Core Rulebook under the heading "Size and Magic Items."
Her weapon deals damage as for a Large creature, at least (this is the case both for Xanesha's adventure writeup and for the normal version in the Bestiary). Unlike, say, a Centaur or a Lamia, Lamia Matriarchs don't have the "oversized weapons" quality.
Maybe they should have and it's just an oversight :)
Her weapon deals damage as for a Large creature, at least (this is the case both for Xanesha's adventure writeup and for the normal version in the Bestiary). Unlike, say, a Centaur or a Lamia, Lamia Matriarchs don't have the "oversized weapons" quality.
Maybe they should have and it's just an oversight :)
I decided the lamia matriarch did have the undersized weapons rule. It made sense at the time, though now I can't remember why.
I decided the lamia matriarch did have the undersized weapons rule. It made sense at the time, though now I can't remember why.Her weapon deals damage as for a Large creature, at least (this is the case both for Xanesha's adventure writeup and for the normal version in the Bestiary). Unlike, say, a Centaur or a Lamia, Lamia Matriarchs don't have the "oversized weapons" quality.
Maybe they should have and it's just an oversight :)
It definitely does make sense. They have human sized torso's as far as I can tell. I'll rule it the same way once my players hit Xanesha.
Her weapon deals damage as for a Large creature, at least (this is the case both for Xanesha's adventure writeup and for the normal version in the Bestiary). Unlike, say, a Centaur or a Lamia, Lamia Matriarchs don't have the "oversized weapons" quality.
Maybe they should have and it's just an oversight :)
As the "undersized weapons" ability was only introduced with the Pathfinder RPG Bestiary, it's no big surprise that creatures from an Adventure Path issue designed for 3.5 don't have it. I'm quite certain that the lamia matriarch would get this quality just like a standard lamia if restatted for the Pathfinder RPG.
As the "undersized weapons" ability was only introduced with the Pathfinder RPG Bestiary, it's no big surprise that creatures from an Adventure Path issue designed for 3.5 don't have it. I'm quite certain that the lamia matriarch would get this quality just like a standard lamia if restatted for the Pathfinder RPG.
That's a good point. I had completely forgotten that 3.5 centaur and lamia didn't have anything like that ability.. Although I'm sure I remember some 3.5 monster had something like it.
