Various Oracle "armor bonus" Revelations and Magic Vestment

[raidou]

Is there any reason people can see that the armor provided by the "armor of bones," "wood armor," "spirit shield," and "cloak of darkness" Oracle Revelations could not be further enhanced by a Magic Vestment spell?

[Starglim]

Armor of bones: "You can conjure armor..."
Magic vestment: "You imbue a suit of armor or a shield .. An outfit of regular clothing counts as armor .. for [this] purpose..."

As long as the other revelations you mention create, or add an armor bonus to, a suit of armor, a shield or an outfit of regular clothing, magic vestment should work fine.

If the protection granted can't be described as armor but has an armor bonus, you're out of luck, as you'd have to cast magic vestment on your clothes and the resulting armor bonus wouldn't stack.

[Gallard Stormeye]

Would you let someone enchant an application of Mage Armor?

Armor has downsides. If you want the advantages of armor (including enchanting said armor to improve it) you should wear actual armor.

[Beckett]

I allow it, and a few others as well. Mage Armor, Shield, Shield of Faith, and other similar spells, within a certain reason.

[someweirdguy]

Gallard Stormeye wrote:

Would you let someone enchant an application of Mage Armor?

Armor has downsides. If you want the advantages of armor (including enchanting said armor to improve it) you should wear actual armor.

Except, as Starglim quoted, the spell allows clothing to count for it. Because Magic Vestment adds to the enhancement bonus of Armor, and the Oracle revelations add to the plain Armor bonus, they would stack.

Honestly, I would allow Mage Armor to stack as well, for the same reasons.

[raidou]

Before this conversation, I hadn't even considered Mage Armor. But in thinking about it some more, it seems like this would work. Bracers of Armor too, given its wording:

bracers of armor wrote:

They surround the wearer with an invisible but tangible field of force, granting him an armor bonus of +1 to +8, just as though he were wearing armor.

Interesting.

[Starglim]

I'd exclude invisible fields of force and effects that work "as though he were wearing armor". The wording of magic vestment seems to require a physical focus. Nothing prevents that physical focus from being magical already, though, or conjured by magic.

[Lonwyr]

You can always cast a Mage Armor (+4 armor bonus) and add a enhance bonus to your clothes (is a valid target in the spell description).

Now you have a Mage Armor +4 armor +0 enhance and cloth +0 armor and +X enhance. The same bonuses won't stack, but you have different.

Problem solved ;)

[Dragonchess Player]

This often comes up, but it's a misreading of enhancement bonuses and the spell magic vestment. The enhancement bonus from magic vestment adds to the specific item that is the target of the spell; it's not a general "AC bonus type." If you have clothing (+0 armor) and a buckler shield (+1 shield), both with magic vestment cast on them, as well as mage armor (+4 armor) and shield (+4 shield) spells active, you do not get to stack the enhancement bonus from magic vestment on the armor and shield bonuses from mage armor and shield, since they are not the targets of the magic vestment spells; you get the better of +0+X or +4 for your armor and +1+X or +4 for your shield. Allowing enhancement bonuses to armor/shields to be mixed and matched in this manner would be like allowing someone fighting with a +1 holy keen scimitar and a +4 short sword to apply the +4 enhancement bonus from the short sword on the attack and damage rolls with the scimitar.

If an oracle's revelations conjure physical armor that can be the target of magic vestment, then you can enhance it (although the magic vestment would terminate if the armor is dismissed or vanishes and would need to be cast again when the armor is called back). Note that Armor of Bones, Ice Armor, and Wood Armor have a solid physical component, while Air Barrier, Cloak of Darkness, Coat of Many Stars, and Spirit Shield do not.

[Nathanial321]

Target armor or shield touched
It says you must touch it. I agree with Dragonchess Player that the item must be physical to be touched. If one can touch a non-physical item then by all means it should be considered a valid target.

[LazarX]

raidou wrote:

Is there any reason people can see that the armor provided by the "armor of bones," "wood armor," "spirit shield," and "cloak of darkness" Oracle Revelations could not be further enhanced by a Magic Vestment spell?

Yes.... because it's not a valid target for the spell any more than mage armor or magic vestment itself would be. It's not armor but another spell effect that provides an armor bonus.

If you're going to use magic vestment, you dispense with those revelations entirely, and simply get a suit of armor to cast the spell on.

[Stome]

LazarX wrote:

raidou wrote:

Is there any reason people can see that the armor provided by the "armor of bones," "wood armor," "spirit shield," and "cloak of darkness" Oracle Revelations could not be further enhanced by a Magic Vestment spell?

Yes.... because it's not a valid target for the spell any more than mage armor or magic vestment itself would be. It's not armor but another spell effect that provides an armor bonus.

If you're going to use magic vestment, you dispense with those revelations entirely, and simply get a suit of armor to cast the spell on.

This is a nice opinion and all but it is not supported by any rules anywhere. There is nowhere that says that something physical that comes into being by magic is treated any different then something that comes into being by mundane means.

These abilities create something physical that you are wearing and that satisfies the needs of magic vestment. Unlike mage armor.

If you don't like it and would house rule it that's fine. But this is not an opinion forum its a rules forum.

[Remy Balster]

Quote:

An invisible but tangible field of force surrounds the subject of a mage armor spell, providing a +4 armor bonus to AC.

You can touch mage armor. Mage armor is tangible.

If you think about it, pretty much any spell or ability that provides an armor bonus to ac is going to be touchable... I mean, that is what it does, right? Blocks attacks? How would it do that if you couldn’t even touch it?? Silly.