I don't see why not. WotC has cloth armor which is the same deal. I'd even allow for magic tattoos to hold Armor enchantments for those that don't wear armor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Topic says it all, can a monk enchant his clothing?
Don't think you can have your cake and eat it too. You either view clothes as a form of armor and thus enchantable, or not. If they are a form of armor, monks aren't proficient with any armor and lose their monk abilities while wearing them. If they aren't considered armor, then they shouldn't be enchantable as armor either.
Topic says it all, can a monk enchant his clothing?
I'd treat it as bracers of armor that take up a different slot, otherwise, I don't see the harm in it.
I don't see a problem. Robes of the archmagi are definitely robes, using a different slot than armor, yet have an armor bonus to AC. Precedent has thus already been established.
Topic says it all, can a monk enchant his clothing?I'd treat it as bracers of armor that take up a different slot, otherwise, I don't see the harm in it.
Now that works for me. Just wouldn't allow Bracers of Armor to stack with clothes that have a +5 enhancement bonus, for example.
Topic says it all, can a monk enchant his clothing?I'd treat it as bracers of armor that take up a different slot, otherwise, I don't see the harm in it.Now that works for me. Just wouldn't allow Bracers of Armor to stack with clothes that have a +5 enhancement bonus, for example.
Absolutely. It would still be providing an enhancement bonus to an armor bonus to AC, which would not stack with bracers of armor, since they also provide an enhancement bonus to an armor bonus to AC.
There is also a spell somewhere (magic vestment?) which gives armor a temporary enhancement bonus and says that you can treat normal clothes as armor with an AC value of 0 for the purposes of enhancing them with it. More precedent.
Absolutely. It would still be providing an enhancement bonus to an armor bonus to AC, which would not stack with bracers of armor, since they also provide an enhancement bonus to an armor bonus to AC.
That part wasn't as clear to me. Reading the fine print, bracers just say they provide an armor bonus as if wearing armor, whereas enchanting armor adds an enhancement bonus to armor, hence my clarification in case someone was looking for a loophole.
I don't see a problem. Robes of the archmagi are definitely robes, using a different slot than armor, yet have an armor bonus to AC. Precedent has thus already been established.
Yea, but same way, you'd be making a wonderous item, using Craft Wonderous Items, not Craft Arms & Armor, and using the custom magic items rules, rather than just enchanting a suit of clothing with the conventional magic armor options as though it were padded armor (making it much more in the GM realm to adjudicate cost and such).
I don't see a problem. Robes of the archmagi are definitely robes, using a different slot than armor, yet have an armor bonus to AC. Precedent has thus already been established.Yea, but same way, you'd be making a wonderous item, using Craft Wonderous Items, not Craft Arms & Armor, and using the custom magic items rules, rather than just enchanting a suit of clothing with the conventional magic armor options as though it were padded armor (making it much more in the GM realm to adjudicate cost and such).
Yes, but the original question was about whether or not the monk could enchant his clothes. The answer to this is yes, with an understanding that the monk wants his AC to improve. Clothing has always been under the Wondrous Item category, so I named a wondrous item that improved AC and fit the description of "clothes". Once you start thinking of clothing as armor, the monk gets into trouble, so I tried to shy away from that. It's no big stretch to add armor magical qualities to clothing. Shadow, for example, is duplicated by a cloak of elvenkind.
Yes, but the original question was about whether or not the monk could enchant his clothes. The answer to this is yes, with an understanding that the monk wants his AC to improve. Clothing has always been under the Wondrous Item category, so I named a wondrous item that improved AC and fit the description of "clothes". Once you start thinking of clothing as armor, the monk gets into trouble, so I tried to shy away from that. It's no big stretch to add armor magical qualities to clothing. Shadow, for example, is duplicated by a cloak of elvenkind.
Right, right - all what I was saying was just to note all that. Some people are liable to just treat cloathing as armor that grants no AC bonus, not appreciate the distinction (adding armor bonus, natural though might be to apply the armor rules).
[edit: like below]
I can't enchant anything, because magic isn't real.
Monks don't enchant jack, either.
A spellcaster with Craft Magic Arms & Armor can, tho.
Can you enchant clothes as armor? No. Cloth Armor does not exist.
You CAN make Clothing of Armor just like bracers of armor. They can have armor bonuses and they can have various armor effects just like armor does.
It would be up to your DM to decide if this is allowed as a custom magic item... and it could have the 50% increase in cost for using a non-standard slot per the item creations rules.
The game is built around classes that wear armor and classes that do not wear armor or take very harsh penalties for doing so. Saying that cloth is "Armor" is trying to get around the fact that they want the magic of armor but they do not want to have the penalties of armor. This role is filled by Bracers of Armor already and they cost more then normal armor for a reason.
So final answer is yes you can make it, but unless the DM in your game is very nice you will pay more then if you just went out and bought bracers of armor already. At least that is my two bits.
Can you enchant clothes as armor? No. Cloth Armor does not exist.
You CAN make Clothing of Armor just like bracers of armor. They can have armor bonuses and they can have various armor effects just like armor does.
It would be up to your DM to decide if this is allowed as a custom magic item... and it could have the 50% increase in cost for using a non-standard slot per the item creations rules.
The game is built around classes that wear armor and classes that do not wear armor or take very harsh penalties for doing so. Saying that cloth is "Armor" is trying to get around the fact that they want the magic of armor but they do not want to have the penalties of armor. This role is filled by Bracers of Armor already and they cost more then normal armor for a reason.
So final answer is yes you can make it, but unless the DM in your game is very nice you will pay more then if you just went out and bought bracers of armor already. At least that is my two bits.
There is no 50% increase for using a nonstandard slot. There is a 100% increase for using no slot, but a custom item can use whatever slot you want subject to GM approval without changing the price at all.
Also, bracers of armor cost EXACTLY as much as regular armor to enchant. It is the enhancement bonus squared x 1000 gp. They cost more than mundane armor, yes, but not more than any other form of armor enchantment.
Absolutely. It would still be providing an enhancement bonus to an armor bonus to AC, which would not stack with bracers of armor, since they also provide an enhancement bonus to an armor bonus to AC.That part wasn't as clear to me. Reading the fine print, bracers just say they provide an armor bonus as if wearing armor, whereas enchanting armor adds an enhancement bonus to armor, hence my clarification in case someone was looking for a loophole.
Ah true, it is just a flat armor AC bonus. But it still won't stack with clothes enhanced to have an armor AC bonus either. Both are armor bonuses, so no stacking there. On top of that:
If a creature receives a larger armor bonus from another source, the bracers of armor cease functioning and do not grant their armor bonus or their armor special abilities. If the bracers of armor grant a larger armor bonus, the other source of armor ceases functioning.
My players love weirdness and variety, so I am always working up otherwise normal-seeming clothing with deflection bonuses (ala rings of protection), or turning odd things into weapons (such as a +1 shovel). Using rings or bracers of armor, or similar to guide the former is easy enough. Really, there should be nothing stopping someone from having a cloak of protection +2. It may take up room that could be otherwise better spent, but that's the choice of the player, and it has never broken a game.
For weird weapons, I just compute the cost of the normal item applying the masterwork rules for weapons, and then add whatever for the magic bonuses and/or other materials. Damage is based on whatever is the obvious type/size. Typically, the NPC wielding it has taken an Exotic Weapon Proficiency to wield it correctly. Victorious PCs can usually try to sell the item off as a novelty or memento (yes, I adjust the treasure values of the whole take to compensate for unsellable things). On rare occasions, they take the relevant feat themselves. Some of my players ask for odd weapons (like frying pans), and I just do it up the same way. If they want to trade the ability to upgrade or replace a broken weapon quickly, with upkeep or customization to get their unique feel, I am more than happy to oblige.
I don't see a problem. Robes of the archmagi are definitely robes, using a different slot than armor, yet have an armor bonus to AC. Precedent has thus already been established.Robes of the Archmage is a wondrous item, not magical armor -- so don't expect to make hay out a "precedent" argument.
Fair enough. There's a precedent for an armor bonus to AC in the form of clothing. I can say that much, at least. And that there are wondrous items with abilities similar to those of armor, such as vests of escape and cloaks of elvenkind. You're right that clothing as armor hasn't come into being yet, though I recall in either Relics & Rituals 1 or 2 of the Scarred Lands books there was the reverse, armor as easy to wear as clothing, now that you mention it....
Absolutely. It would still be providing an enhancement bonus to an armor bonus to AC, which would not stack with bracers of armor, since they also provide an enhancement bonus to an armor bonus to AC.
There is also a spell somewhere (magic vestment?) which gives armor a temporary enhancement bonus and says that you can treat normal clothes as armor with an AC value of 0 for the purposes of enhancing them with it. More precedent.
This isn't entirely correct.
Magic vestment specifically states that normal clothes counts as armor with an AC value of 0 "for the purpose af this spell".The rule applying specifically to said spell, does not set precedency for any thing else. If any ruling should be based on it, it most be that normal clothes does not count as an AC 0 armor during other circumstances.
Apart from that, as others mention Bracers of Armor gives the rules (and price) for granting an armor value to a non-armor item.
Absolutely. It would still be providing an enhancement bonus to an armor bonus to AC, which would not stack with bracers of armor, since they also provide an enhancement bonus to an armor bonus to AC.
There is also a spell somewhere (magic vestment?) which gives armor a temporary enhancement bonus and says that you can treat normal clothes as armor with an AC value of 0 for the purposes of enhancing them with it. More precedent.
This isn't entirely correct.
Magic vestment specifically states that normal clothes counts as armor with an AC value of 0 "for the purpose af this spell".
The rule applying specifically to said spell, does not set precedency for any thing else. If any ruling should be based on it, it most be that normal clothes does not count as an AC 0 armor during other circumstances.
If this is a statement is against the OP's idea of enchanting clothing like bracers of armor, signs seem to point that you are incorrect.
Robe of the Archmagi
Aura strong varied; CL 14th
Slot body; Price 75,000 gp; Weight 1 lb.
Description
This normal-appearing garment can be white (01–45 on d%, good alignment), gray (46–75, neither good nor evil alignment), or black (76–100, evil alignment). To most wearers, the robe offers no powers or has no effects unless the wearer's alignment doesn't match that of the robe (see below). Only an arcane spellcaster can fully realize this potent magic item's powers once the robe is donned. These powers are as follows.
+5 armor bonus to AC.
Spell resistance 18.
+4 resistance bonus on all saving throws.
+2 enhancement bonus on caster level checks made to overcome spell resistance.As mentioned above, all robes of the archmagi are attuned to a specific alignment. If a white robe is donned by an evil character, she immediately gains three permanent negative levels. The same is true with respect to a black robe donned by a good character. An evil or good character who puts on a gray robe, or a neutral character who dons either a white or black robe, gains two permanent negative levels. While these negative levels remain as long as the garment is worn and cannot be overcome in any way (including restoration spells), they are immediately removed if the robe is removed.
|
Apart from that, as others mention Bracers of Armor gives the rules (and price) for granting an armor value to a non-armor item.
(Bracers, again, are wondrous items.)
The thing which renders the whole discussion moot is this: any clothing granted an armor class and worn by a (non-Sohei) monk would immediately "turn off" is flurry and innate AC bonuses. IOW, he loses more than he gains.
Apart from that, as others mention Bracers of Armor gives the rules (and price) for granting an armor value to a non-armor item.(Bracers, again, are wondrous items.)
The thing which renders the whole discussion moot is this: any clothing granted an armor class and worn by a (non-Sohei) monk would immediately "turn off" is flurry and innate AC bonuses. IOW, he loses more than he gains.
This makes my head hurt. Why would a magical effect granting armor bonus to AC do this and bracers not?
Because Bracers are a wondrous item, and enchanted clothing is armor; which monks are screwed wearing.
Anything else to tweat/cheat/hoodwink around that, and you're paying Bracers cost anyway.
Monks are awesome, which is why they come with a built-in nerf to level the playing-field.
Wait... are you saying that a all monks need to be naked now to use their class abilities?!?!?
Someone may have already mentioned this, but as a point of order: Magic does not typically provide an armor bonus to AC, it provides an Enhancement bonus to AC. Armor provides an armor bonus, which is why bracers of armor aren't called bracers of magic defense; they specifically grant an armor bonus... which doesn't seem like what the OP was asking about.
My point being, there doesn't seem to be any compelling RAW reason why you can't take a shirt (with an armor bonus of -, making it NOT armor) and place a magic enhancement to it that provides a deflection or armor bonus. In fact, isn't that exactly what rings of protection do?
The argument that placing a magic enhancement on a shirt turns it into armor seems wrong to me because the bonus in question is, once again, not typically an armor bonus.
I would agree that any enchanted clothing falls squarely within the wondrous item category.
Oh, and despite being a wondrous item, bracers of armor are much closer to traditional armor; because they provide an armor bonus and can't be worn along with a suit of armor (at least not to any particularly useful effect).
My point being, there doesn't seem to be any compelling RAW reason why you can't take a shirt (with an armor bonus of -, making it NOT armor) and place a magic enhancement to it that provides a deflection or armor bonus. In fact, isn't that exactly what rings of protection do?
Robe of the Archmagi
Aura strong varied; CL 14th
Slot body; Price 75,000 gp; Weight 1 lb.
Description
This normal-appearing garment can be white (01–45 on d%, good alignment), gray (46–75, neither good nor evil alignment), or black (76–100, evil alignment). To most wearers, the robe offers no powers or has no effects unless the wearer's alignment doesn't match that of the robe (see below). Only an arcane spellcaster can fully realize this potent magic item's powers once the robe is donned. These powers are as follows.
+5 armor bonus to AC.
Spell resistance 18.
+4 resistance bonus on all saving throws.
+2 enhancement bonus on caster level checks made to overcome spell resistance.As mentioned above, all robes of the archmagi are attuned to a specific alignment. If a white robe is donned by an evil character, she immediately gains three permanent negative levels. The same is true with respect to a black robe donned by a good character. An evil or good character who puts on a gray robe, or a neutral character who dons either a white or black robe, gains two permanent negative levels. While these negative levels remain as long as the garment is worn and cannot be overcome in any way (including restoration spells), they are immediately removed if the robe is removed.
If they aren't considered armor, then they shouldn't be enchantable as armor either.
This assumes that the only possible way to increase your AC via enchantment is by enchanting them with enhancement bonuses. (I don't concede that enhancement bonuses are strictly the purview of armor but for the sake of argument...)
There are many other sorts of magic effects that directly affect AC and have had no compelling arguments provided against them: Natural, Sacred, Profane, Dodge, etc...
.
Whoops, I meant to type "and place a magic enhancement on it that provides a deflection or enhancement bonus". Not an armor bonus, I agree that armor bonuses are strictly reserved for armor. For semantic purposes if nothing else.
Aside from that mistype, I'm not sure what the rest of your post was supposed to argue?
.
I would argue that bracers of armor are just armor that doesn't "count" as armor in order to give classes with armor restrictions an expensive means of gaining a bonus that most classes take for granted. ie: balance reasons
Armour? Ewwww, British spelling.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because Bracers are a wondrous item, and enchanted clothing is armor; which monks are screwed wearing.
Anything else to tweat/cheat/hoodwink around that, and you're paying Bracers cost anyway.
Monks are awesome, which is why they come with a built-in nerf to level the playing-field.
Enchanted clothing is not armor, and I see no way you could say it is. The body slot where clothes go is separate from the armor slot. And since your bracer bonus wouldn't stack with your clothes how is any of it cheating or hoodwinking?
And monks are known to suck, pretty bad. Not that it matters, since allowing this gives them absolutely nothing they couldn't already get.
Looking back to a 3.5 book, items that granted an Armor Bonus of +1 to +8 was in the (Arms) or (Body) slot and items that granted an Enhancement Bonus to Natural Armor of +1 to +5 was in the (Body) or (Torso) slot.
Examples of Arm slot items; armbands, bracelets, bracers.
Examples of Body slot items; armor, robes.
Examples of Torso slot items; Shirts, tunics, vests, vestments.
|
|
Yeah, Bracers of Armour aren't 'armour'... that's the entire point of the things. If they were armour, then wearing them would turn off all your cool Monk powers... for that matter so would some Wizard casting a Mage Armour spell on you... which would be harsh, to say the least...
No; Mage Armor is OK -- because it's a spell which grants an enhancement bonus to AC (which stacks with a monk's untyped bonuses).
You wear armor; you don't wear a spell.
Enchanted clothing is not armor, and I see no way you could say it is.
Techically speaking, "enchanted clothing" does not exist in this game (at least not as something you can buy off-the-rack), so that's a moot discussion.
Mage Armor is a spell.
Clerical Vestments is a spell.
Neither of them create armor.
And monks are known to suck, pretty bad.
Anybody who thinks monks suck doesn't know how to make a monk.
Monks are bad-ass, always were bad-ass, and are now even more bad-ass.
Go take a look at Martial Artist (UC).
Pop quiz toss-up: What is the best feature of the Martial Artist archetype, and why?
(I'll be back later to tell you why you're wrong.)
Topic says it all, can a monk enchant his clothing?
Yes. He can enchant it as clothing. Armor takes the armor slot, clothes take the body slot. You can enchant clothes with the same enchantment as bracers of armor have though. But you can't put any armor special properties on clothes.
If this is a statement is against the OP's idea of enchanting clothing like bracers of armor, signs seem to point that you are incorrect.
My argument wasn't against enchanting clothing like bracers of armor, which is the way to go for the desired effect.
My argument was against enchanting clothing with an armor enhancement bonus, like you do with real armor.
You cannot put an armor enhancement bonus on it if the item does not have an armor bonus (apart from magic vestment which specifically allows it). You can however grant an armor bonus to an wondrous item, following the example and price of BoA.
Just seeing that the price is actually the same, it doesn't really matter. Making the distinction, however, does stop people from trying the add an armor enhancement bonus to their bracers of armor, or shirt of armor.
No; Mage Armor is OK -- because it's a spell which grants an enhancement bonus to AC (which stacks with a monk's untyped bonuses).No; mage armor gives an Armor bonus to AC. It does not give an enhancement bonus to AC. It is impossible to get an enhancement bonus to AC using anything that Paizo or WotC has published.
In the same vein, bracers of armor give an armor bonus to AC. By your logic, monks would be prohibited from wearing them.
Correct both effects use the type "armor" for the bonus applied.
Bracers of Armor
Aura moderate conjuration; CL 7th
Slot wrists; Price 1,000 gp (+1), 4,000 gp (+2), 9,000 gp (+3), 16,000 gp (+4), 25,000 gp (+5), 36,000 gp (+6), 49,000 gp (+7), 64,000 gp (+8); Weight 1 lb.
DescriptionThese items appear to be wrist or arm guards. 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. Both bracers must be worn for the magic to be effective.
Alternatively, bracers of armor can be enchanted with armor special abilities. See Table: Armor Special Qualities for a list of abilities. Special abilities usually count as Additional bonuses for determining the market value of an item, but do not improve AC. Bracers of armor cannot have a modified bonus (armor bonus plus armor special ability bonus equivalents) higher than +8. Bracers of armor must have at least a +1 armor bonus to grant an armor special ability. Bracers of armor cannot have any armor special abilities that add a flat gp amount to their cost. Bracers of armor and ordinary armor do not stack. If a creature receives a larger armor bonus from another source, the bracers of armor cease functioning and do not grant their armor bonus or their armor special abilities. If the bracers of armor grant a larger armor bonus, the other source of armor ceases functioning.
and then mage armor spell
Mage Armor
School conjuration (creation) [force]; Level sorcerer/wizard 1, summoner 1, witch 1
CASTINGCasting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, F (a piece of cured leather)
EFFECTRange touch
Target creature touched
Duration 1 hour/level (D)
Saving Throw Will negates (harmless); Spell Resistance noDESCRIPTION
An invisible but tangible field of force surrounds the subject of a mage armor spell, providing a +4 armor bonus to AC.
Unlike mundane armor, mage armor entails no armor check penalty, arcane spell failure chance, or speed reduction. Since mage armor is made of force, incorporeal creatures can't bypass it the way they do normal armor.
So yea a shirt of armor as it takes up the body slot (so why give up a Monk's robe for this i have no idea) is legit but custom magic item for monks/ wizards etc.
I think there are 2 ways of judging this (both house rulings)
1st you can rule that being a monk denies you the magic armour SLOT (ie. you lose one whole slot for equipping magic items) You can certainly wear BoA which can be enchanted to all intense purposes the same as armour (same magic bonuses and extra effects like fortification but no cash allowances on top)
This costs the monk 1 magic item slot
2nd you could rule that a monk loses the mundane bonus of wearing any armour (ie. the mecahanical bonus that wearing even padded armour gives you) You could enchant the clothes of said monk as though they were armour with an AC bonus of +0 and no max dex restriction.
This cost the monk the mechanical/physical benefit of wearing armour (+1 from padded, +4 from chain shirt etc.)
I see nothing wrong with one of the penalties of a class being the loss of a magic item slot, but it could be argued that this is too much of a penalty to the monk and he should only be penalized the physical benefits of not wearing armour (although this come with some benefits such as no armour check penalty, unrestricted max dex, sleeping, donning etc.)
Pop quiz toss-up: What is the best feature of the Martial Artist archetype, and why?
(I'll be back later to tell you why you're wrong.)
No thanks. I'm not interested in power-gaming advice from someone with such a flawed view of the rules, especially one who presents their "advice" in such a condescending manner.
So you know, I do know how to play monks, I play games with people who ONLY play monks and do it VERY well. But there's a big difference in "if you powergame a monk they're totally competent" and "On average a monk is as good as any other class."
|
|
No; Mage Armor is OK -- because it's a spell which grants an enhancement bonus to AC (which stacks with a monk's untyped bonuses).No; mage armor gives an Armor bonus to AC. It does not give an enhancement bonus to AC. It is impossible to get an enhancement bonus to AC using anything that Paizo or WotC has published.
In the same vein, bracers of armor give an armor bonus to AC. By your logic, monks would be prohibited from wearing them.
A bonus is not the same thing as armor.
Armor is heavy stuff that weighs you down.
(An "enchanted shirt", or however you want to describe it or home-brew-craft in such as way as to not nerf a monk, is a wondrous item, not armor)
Vestments and robes (exactly what a monk would want to enchant)obviously take up the Body slot....
That was not stated in the original question. "Clothes" do not default to the body slot. If they did, wearing an outfit (i.e. "clothes") would prevent vestments/robes from being worn.
Is the monk's player asking to use the body slot instead of the bracers slot? If so, I have no problem with that.
It wouldn't "void" the slot anymore than wearing mundane rings voids the two magic ring slots. I like the way that blog discussed it, Intelligence Check's "It's a kind of Magic" I think it was.
No; Mage Armor is OK -- because it's a spell which grants an enhancement bonus to AC (which stacks with a monk's untyped bonuses).No; mage armor gives an Armor bonus to AC. It does not give an enhancement bonus to AC. It is impossible to get an enhancement bonus to AC using anything that Paizo or WotC has published.
In the same vein, bracers of armor give an armor bonus to AC. By your logic, monks would be prohibited from wearing them.
A bonus is not the same thing as armor.
Armor is heavy stuff that weighs you down.
(An "enchanted shirt", or however you want to describe it or home-brew-craft in such as way as to not nerf a monk, is a wondrous item, not armor)
That's what everyone else was saying, and directly contradictory to your earlier statement.