|
So I've got an odd argument going, and I wouldn’t mind some advice.
I'm in a game where a player is using a Monk's robe with the shadow armor enchant and a +1 ac enchant on it, and I've been trying to tell him that putting armor enchants is impossible...but he keeps arguing to the gm that being an armor, it can have armor enchants...but it isn’t. How do I help clear the air, and tbh I’m not actually sure if I’m right at this point...any thoughts?
By RAW no you cannot add any of the armor properties to the monks robe as it is a Wondrous Item and not armor. But It is up to the Gm as to whether he would allow the properties to be added in his game.
Robe, Monk's
Aura moderate transmutation; CL 10th
Slot body; Price 13,000 gp; Weight 1 lb.
Description
This simple brown robe, when worn, confers great ability in unarmed combat. If the wearer has levels in monk, her AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher. If donned by a character with the Stunning Fist feat, the robe lets her make one additional stunning attack per day. If the character is not a monk, she gains the AC and unarmed damage of a 5th-Level monk (although she does not add her Wisdom bonus to her AC). This AC bonus functions just like the monk's AC bonus.
Construction Requirements
Craft Wondrous Item, righteous might or transformation; Cost 6,500 gp
Like bigkilla said, by the rules, if the item does not require Craft Arms and Armor to make, then it cannot receive those types of enhancements.
Look through the available robes.
There's at least two on the list that prove you wrong.
Monks robes being a wondrous item is strange. Should be a 0 AC armor. It's not padded so it shouldn't offer protection, but if it takes up the same slot armor would, it should be eligible for similar upgrades.
|
Yeah, but the robes that impart an AC bonus do so via mage armor. shield of faith and the like. That said, there is no reason he could not have mage armor (or magic vestment, which does consider articles of clothing as armor for purposes of the enhancement bonus from the spell) imbued into the robes as well as invisibility (which is used in the armor enchantment for the Shadow enhancement). Of course, this would not be cheap ...
i`m under the impression that robes DON`T use the same slot as armor.
saying it should require proficiency in crafting armor even though it offers no AC protection seems strange to me. wondrous item seems spot on for what it actually does.
you may be able to craft a robe that has AC boosts using special custom item crafting rules, but I would say you are well within your rights to say that the monk`s robe is not an armor item that takes armor enhancements, and that you as a GM are not allowing custom slot armor items besides what is in the book, and that special armor enhancments (either +x equivalent or fixed cost) only apply to armor using craft magical armor.
So I've got an odd argument going, and I wouldn’t mind some advice.
I'm in a game where a player is using a Monk's robe with the shadow armor enchant and a +1 ac enchant on it, and I've been trying to tell him that putting armor enchants is impossible...but he keeps arguing to the gm that being an armor, it can have armor enchants...but it isn’t. How do I help clear the air, and tbh I’m not actually sure if I’m right at this point...any thoughts?
I would say that technically, the robe isn't armor, it's clothing. However, as pointed out above, there are already other robes that do provide armor bonuses to AC (robe of the archmagi, another one I can't remember), so I don't see why you couldn't add it to the monk's robe, too. Also, the magic vestment spell treats normal clothing as "armor that grants no AC bonus", so it's reasonable that normal clothing (robes, shirts, codpieces, whatever) could be enchanted with an AC bonus.
Board consensus generally indicates monks get crazy-high AC, though, so you might want to strike a deal with him where if it gets too crazy and he becomes the untouchable monk of doom, you have the right to swap the enchantment for something else.
there are already other robes that do provide armor bonuses to AC (robe of the archmagi, another one I can't remember), so I don't see why you couldn't add it to the monk's robe, too.
But those don`t offer special armor enhancement abilities, they just come with the stated bonus, so claiming that he is `entitled` to apply armor bonuses to the monk`s robe (or robe of archmagi) is certainly not a sure thing... People get bracers of armor for that kind of thing, which this character is free to do as well.
there are already other robes that do provide armor bonuses to AC (robe of the archmagi, another one I can't remember), so I don't see why you couldn't add it to the monk's robe, too.But those don`t offer special armor enhancement abilities, they just come with the stated bonus, so claiming that he is `entitled` to apply armor bonuses to the monk`s robe (or robe of archmagi) is certainly not a sure thing... People get bracers of armor for that kind of thing, which this character is free to do as well.
"Entitled" is the wrong word. "Capable" of holding armor enchants is a better way to say that.
Regardless if robes and armor use the same slot (which I think they do) armor bonuses from different sources don't stack. Platemail doesnt stack with bracers of armor or mage armor, or a magic robe with an armor bonus. So if they do or don't use the same slot is basically immaterial. Besides, a person who would wear armor typically doesn't wear a robe.
A monk can wear a robe of the archmagi easily enough and get the armor bonus. I see no reason that a monk's robe couldn't be similarily enchanted with an armor quality (or shadow).
|
From a purely RAW standpoint, I would say the robes are not available for that type of enhancement. This either needs to come from armor or bracers of armor.
And the 'body' slot is completely separate from the 'armor' slot. Scroll down to the "Magic Items on the Body" section.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Am I the only person who thought, "Ok, it's armor. You can wear it and it shuts down all your monk abilities. Anything else?" ;-)
Part of me wants to say that it shouldn't because it doesn't 'feel' right. OTOH, they have bracers of armor available...
I *would* require Craft Wondrous Item and Craft Arms and Armor though.
There are lots of reasons to not say robes are armor, the main one being robes are not armor!
Why are the robes, robes and not armor?...
.....b/c monk abilities do not work while wearing armor...Applying an AC bonus kind of assumes it has an AC to start with...
Once again we are back to robes are armor in some way, magical robes (that are very expensive) add bonuses to AC (really are those armor bonuses, enhancement, deflection, what are they).......
"My monks robes are mithral!"
what I used the special materials section and added it in!
****facepalm*******
"armor" and "armor bonus" are not the same thing. No one is saying Robes = armor. There is prescedent for enchanating robes witn a magical armor bonus. It's more like a permanent mage armor emination. Monk's robes should be no exception.
For the record the AC bonus type of magical robes is ARMOR bonus created by magic. It would not stack with platemail (for example). Just as a mage could not cast Mage Armor (an armor bonus) then put on a mundane breastplate and expect them to stack.
Please read the PHB before you contribute.
|
|
there are already other robes that do provide armor bonuses to AC (robe of the archmagi, another one I can't remember), so I don't see why you couldn't add it to the monk's robe, too.But those don`t offer special armor enhancement abilities, they just come with the stated bonus, so claiming that he is `entitled` to apply armor bonuses to the monk`s robe (or robe of archmagi) is certainly not a sure thing... People get bracers of armor for that kind of thing, which this character is free to do as well."Entitled" is the wrong word. "Capable" of holding armor enchants is a better way to say that.
Regardless if robes and armor use the same slot (which I think they do) armor bonuses from different sources don't stack. Platemail doesnt stack with bracers of armor or mage armor, or a magic robe with an armor bonus. So if they do or don't use the same slot is basically immaterial. Besides, a person who would wear armor typically doesn't wear a robe.
A monk can wear a robe of the archmagi easily enough and get the armor bonus. I see no reason that a monk's robe couldn't be similarily enchanted with an armor quality (or shadow).
Just to correct, robes and armor do not use the same slot:
the PRD on magic items[/url]]Armor: suits of armor.
Belts: belts and girdles.
Body: robes and vestments.
Chest: mantles, shirts, and vests.
Eyes: eyes, glasses, and goggles.
Feet: boots, shoes, and slippers.
Hands: gauntlets and gloves.
Head: circlets, crowns, hats, helms, and masks.
Headband: headbands and phylacteries.
Neck: amulets, brooches, medallions, necklaces, periapts, and scarabs.
Ring (up to two): rings.
Shield: shields.
Shoulders: capes and cloaks.
Wrist: bracelets and bracers.
But you are correct, for the most part, bonuses of the same type do not stack.
Sure, you can create a custom wondrous item (if your GM allows since they are in the non-standard range) that is a monks robe +1 with the shadow armor ability. My best guess would be that this would cost about 18250 GP to buy (so 9125gp to create).
I base this on the following:
Monks Robe 13000 GP
+1 AC 1500 GP (1000gp +50% as an additional ability added to the robe)
+5 stealth skill check (2500 gp + 50% as an additional ability, the 2500 is reached by sill bonus squared * 100)
But the GM can always say no to this, and as stated, pricing custom magic items is an artform not a science.. :)
I think it odd when people question custom items, creating custom items is part of the fun for me; especially as a DM. The item creation rules are wonky at times but all in all very well thought out and cover most contingencies. There's a price for getting to whacky if it's paid it's all good.
I wonder why some find a robe that has a magical armor bonus odd; robes cover the majority of your body, yet magic bracers completely natural; they only cover your forearms.
Incidentally I'm a Monk proponent and I hate monk robes. They make any knucklehead a pseudo monk. How come there are no robes that make my monk a 5th lvl spellcaster (not really that'd be horrible). Items that step on class toes are bad ideas in my worldview.
The precedent is not for robes, it is for wonderous items.
There are two major precedents:
*Bracers of Armor; this gives a static bonus and/or special ability( that can be purchased with a +1 thru +5 bonus) without Craft Magic Arms and Armor.
*Amulet of Mighty Fists; as above with weapon mods.
Precedents, if that is way you want to handle it, should most likely be determined by the class of item creation feat not the individual item type. An excellent example is a Second Darkness NPC that has a lesser metamagic rod that is a dagger. The dagger is NOT a magic weapon but it does enhance spellcasting. Cool, different yet functionally not much different than it's Core Rulebook version.
Craft Wonderous Items is a very powerful feat. It is also where most item creation wonkiness comes from. Be aware that altering this feat can have massive effects long term.
What is the precident for adding armor bonuses to any and all robes?
1 precedent makes it readily avaiable wow must be a lawyer type! ;)Sure the robe of the archmage, which is a major item costs 75,000 gold to buy.....and only functions on a spellcaster and has to have a similar alignment....
prec·e·dent [n. pres-i-duhnt; adj. pri-seed-nt, pres-i-duhnt] Show IPA
noun1.Law. a legal decision or form of proceeding serving as an authoritative rule or pattern in future similar or analogous cases.
2.any act, decision, or case that serves as a guide or justification for subsequent situations.
The robes of the archmage are the precedent for armor bonus on robes. Note the bolded part.
Robe or the archmage are alignment restrictive, not caster only. You can be a commoner and wear it so long as that commoners alignment matches. Actually the only thing that commoner (or monk) wouldn't be able to take advantage of is the spell penetration feature. Frankly it's kind of an awesome item. As a monk I might prefer it over the monk robes.
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.
CoNSTruCTIoN
requirements Craft Wondrous Item, antimagic field, mage armor
or shield of faith, creator must be of same alignment as robe;
Cost 37,500
The precedent is not for robes, it is for wonderous items.
There are two major precedents:
*Bracers of Armor; this gives a static bonus and/or special ability( that can be purchased with a +1 thru +5 bonus) without Craft Magic Arms and Armor.
*Amulet of Mighty Fists; as above with weapon mods.
Precedents, if that is way you want to handle it, should most likely be determined by the class of item creation feat not the individual item type. An excellent example is a Second Darkness NPC that has a lesser metamagic rod that is a dagger. The dagger is NOT a magic weapon but it does enhance spellcasting. Cool, different yet functionally not much different than it's Core Rulebook version.
Craft Wonderous Items is a very powerful feat. It is also where most item creation wonkiness comes from. Be aware that altering this feat can have massive effects long term.
Good point. Bracers of armor are another prescient for Craft Wondrous Item to bestow an armor bonus.
|
|
I don't see a problem with adding armor enhancements to a wonderous item like a robe, as long as you apply the price increase for multiple abilities on a single item. It would be more cost effective to use bracers of armor instead.
This is a simple RAW way of doing things that many people overlook. You add 1.5 X the cost of the bracers of Armor into the cost of the Monks Robe. This allows you to enchant the robe as if the player were wearing bracers as well and then follow the bracers rules for additional abilities such as Shadow armor enchantment. Otherwise he has to have 2 different magic items. The Monks robes are not armor.
If you do look at the robes listed with AC cost they are damned expensive, my assumption is that this cost was figured into them.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Magic armor enhancement bonuses are for actual armor (in the armor chapter).That's why magic vestment makes robes into armor with enhancement bonuses, right?
There is no simulationist, gamist, or logical reason that you can't add Armor bonuses to AC onto a robe.
The 'reason' is because that's what the rules are. "Armor" can be enhanced with magic armor bonuses. Bracers are not armor, if they were they wouldn't need that special fiddly wording that allows them to gain armor special properties, they would also use enhancement bonuses rather than using mage armor as the pre-requisite and granting an armor bonus. If robes were armor they would gain enhancement bonuses to AC, not armor bonuses based on mage armor, Bracers of defence wouldn't even exist in the game because people would just give robes a +1 enhancement bonus.
Similarly a ring of force shield cannot be given shield enhancements, because it's not actually a shield.
As for special properties, you can't apply them unless the armor has a +1 enhancement bonus which the robes and bracers lack. You can't give them a +1 enhancement bonus because... they aren't armor.
Pay the extra cost and I'm generally good with it -- I'll probably limit you to +5 maximum though of actual protection from the robes, +5 more in special stuff. Heck if you are willing to pay the 1.5 increase and rise losing more than one 'simple' item if something happens I'll let you do it.
I'm generally not a jerk about targeting equipment but hey if it happens it happens.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Pay the extra cost and I'm generally good with it -- I'll probably limit you to +5 maximum though of actual protection from the robes, +5 more in special stuff. Heck if you are willing to pay the 1.5 increase and rise losing more than one 'simple' item if something happens I'll let you do it.
I'm generally not a jerk about targeting equipment but hey if it happens it happens.
This is a reasonable take on it (though technically not correct).
|
|
Magic armor enhancement bonuses are for actual armor (in the armor chapter).That's why magic vestment makes robes into armor with enhancement bonuses, right?
There is no simulationist, gamist, or logical reason that you can't add Armor bonuses to AC onto a robe.
The 'reason' is because that's what the rules are. "Armor" can be enhanced with magic armor bonuses. Bracers are not armor, if they were they wouldn't need that special fiddly wording that allows them to gain armor special properties, they would also use enhancement bonuses rather than using mage armor as the pre-requisite and granting an armor bonus. If robes were armor they would gain enhancement bonuses to AC, not armor bonuses based on mage armor, Bracers of defence wouldn't even exist in the game because people would just give robes a +1 enhancement bonus.
Similarly a ring of force shield cannot be given shield enhancements, because it's not actually a shield.
As for special properties, you can't apply them unless the armor has a +1 enhancement bonus which the robes and bracers lack. You can't give them a +1 enhancement bonus because... they aren't armor.
Custom magic items are just that, custom. the only RAW we have to follow on this is here and what the GM will allow.
If your GM allows you to add armor bonus to robes, there are rules to work out the cost in the core book. But now you are in custom magic item territory.
RAW allows for it. your GM may not (which is their right, it is hard sometimes balancing in custom magic items with their cost and how it will effect the game world.)
This is a reasonable take on it (though technically not correct).Pay the extra cost and I'm generally good with it -- I'll probably limit you to +5 maximum though of actual protection from the robes, +5 more in special stuff. Heck if you are willing to pay the 1.5 increase and rise losing more than one 'simple' item if something happens I'll let you do it.
I'm generally not a jerk about targeting equipment but hey if it happens it happens.
Sure it is -- custom items are perfectly legal in play and an armor bonus costs what is listed. The body slot is listed as a protective slot from which defensive bonus can be derived. Even if it wasn't it is perfectly fine to allow an armor bonus from such an item at extra cost if the GM decides it's needed. Personally I wouldn't, but that's just it -- it is explicitly allowed with GM approval. Which means it is perfectly legal even if fuzzy in a way most rules lawyers don't like.
Quit being contrite, or contrary... or whatever con it is I don't like at the moment because I'm not doing it.
Magic armor enhancement bonuses are for actual armor (in the armor chapter).That's why magic vestment makes robes into armor with enhancement bonuses, right?
There is no simulationist, gamist, or logical reason that you can't add Armor bonuses to AC onto a robe.
The 'reason' is because that's what the rules are. "Armor" can be enhanced with magic armor bonuses. Bracers are not armor, if they were they wouldn't need that special fiddly wording that allows them to gain armor special properties, they would also use enhancement bonuses rather than using mage armor as the pre-requisite and granting an armor bonus. If robes were armor they would gain enhancement bonuses to AC, not armor bonuses based on mage armor, Bracers of defence wouldn't even exist in the game because people would just give robes a +1 enhancement bonus.
Similarly a ring of force shield cannot be given shield enhancements, because it's not actually a shield.
As for special properties, you can't apply them unless the armor has a +1 enhancement bonus which the robes and bracers lack. You can't give them a +1 enhancement bonus because... they aren't armor.
Where in the rules does it say, specifically, that you can't give armor bonuses to non armors?
More to the point bracers use Mage Armor as a prerequisite due to the fact that there is NO Core spell that enhances AC as an enhancement bonus in the Arcane lists. Bracers of armor are clearly an item designed for arcane full casters (yet useful to others), thus it has a component of Mage Armor; Even though Magic Vestment would seem to be a better candidate for the item due to it's variable bonus and the appearance of bonuses that are weaker than Mage Armor.
Another clear reason that bracers get a bonus over a robe from an item crafters perspective is simple, everyday wear. Bracers are really just jewelry, whereas a robe when worn everyday limits the crafters ability to adapt to changing fashions.
For a similar reason magic armors use Divine prereqs since most arcane casters don't use armor ( only Bards in the Core Rules).
As for Magic Vestment I see no reason that this spell couldn't be a prereq. for a permanent AC boosting article of clothing. It's actually counterintuitive to think otherwise, although counterintuitive items do exist.
I'll concede magic armor properties might be illegal on other items but that should be a case by case basis. If the property that boosts Stealth checks is an issue I'll just point to Elven Boots and Cloaks similar bonuses on Wonderous Items.
The Glamer armor property, would be an ideal property for any article of clothing from a mercantile standpoint, it's just unnecessary for the typical adventurer, the adventurer who can mask his full plate however has a concrete advantage in numerous situations.
Fiddly wording on an item to make it an exception does not preclude putting diddly wording on something else, once an exception exists it's a precedent that's how precedents work. D20 is not an exception based ruleset, at least not yet.
the Pricing formulae in the core rulebook are no less RAW than a wizard casting spells from the wizard spell list. they just happen to be hard to find.
|
Really, if you don't like it, then give it some ridiculous zonky price. Point out to the player the section in the magic creation rules where it says that the formulas are just a guideline for price, and that you think the ability to bypass the monk restriction on wearing armor is a very valuable, and expensive, ability.
Or just lay it out to him.
Monks are restricted from wearing armor.
He is trying to get around that restriction with fiddly word-play.
Robes do not take up the armor slot.
If he wants to enchant the robes as armor, that's fine. However, it will then be considered armor and activate the monk restriction. Plus, there's the whole cost increase for multiple different abilities and such.
really, he could just enchant the robe as if it were also bracers of armor for a 50% markup. and bracers of armor can take both armor special abilities and flat cost abilities.
monks can get away with bracers of armor, why not a monk's robe that provides an armor bonus to AC and a few special abilities as if it were a pair of bracers of armor.
or he could just get the darn bracers.
Monks are restricted from wearing armor.
He is trying to get around that restriction with fiddly word-play.
Robes do not take up the armor slot.
If he wants to enchant the robes as armor, that's fine. However, it will then be considered armor and activate the monk restriction. Plus, there's the whole cost increase for multiple different abilities and such.
There are two different things at play here, the monk loses all his bonuses if he wears armor ( in the armor slot which he is denied, more so than any other class). An armor bonus on an item in the body slot is not armor regardless of the magical enchantment added to the item occupying the slot.
Monks are restricted from wearing armor.
He is trying to get around that restriction with fiddly word-play.
Robes do not take up the armor slot.
If he wants to enchant the robes as armor, that's fine. However, it will then be considered armor and activate the monk restriction. Plus, there's the whole cost increase for multiple different abilities and such.
There are two different things at play here, the monk loses all his bonuses if he wears armor ( in the armor slot which he is denied, more so than any other class). An armor bonus on an item in the body slot is not armor regardless of the magical enchantment added to the item occupying the slot.
Does a monk lose his abilities if he gets magic vestment cast on a non armor item (say a shirt) worn in the armor slot?
If not then a robe with a enhancement bonus to its armor wouldn't affect him any differently.
As others have stated its really up to the GM and the player should respect the decision.
That being said, I would use the Bracers of Armor as a guideline allowing for Armor special abilities with an AC bonus (example fortification, wild) and not allow Armor special abilities with a falt gp value (example slick, shadow, etherealness) and price the item according to Table 15-29 on page 550 (Core rulebook).
Something to consider is to allow the new custom item to grant a skill bonus as per the same table (15-29) which could grant the player with the stealth bonuses he/she wants through the "shadow" armor ability.
My ranty stuffI usually agree with you TCG and I still love you even though you are belittling and looking down on me ;)
Must be my short kenderish stature@ ;)
I love you man!
I don't mean to belittle. ... Well, in all honestly I did mean to belittle a little (pun intended). Not you specifically, just the world in general.
These boards infuriate me sometimes because it seems people have discussions without using the same vocabulary. Hence the posted definition.
Sorry if I offended you. That wasn't my goal.
My side of the debate is summed up as;
There are rules for armored robes (see custom magic items), however it requires DM permission. No DM I have ever played with would have a problem with such an item (in this case Armored monks robe of shadow) if it was payed for properly. If your DM is so nitpicky as to care then you both have my sympathies.
Note: "you" in the synopsis doesn't specifically mean you, Kenderkin. "You" is used to mean anyone who is reading. ;-)
So I've got an odd argument going, and I wouldn’t mind some advice.
I'm in a game where a player is using a Monk's robe with the shadow armor enchant and a +1 ac enchant on it, and I've been trying to tell him that putting armor enchants is impossible...but he keeps arguing to the gm that being an armor, it can have armor enchants...but it isn’t. How do I help clear the air, and tbh I’m not actually sure if I’m right at this point...any thoughts?
I don't see any "PAthfinder" only statement so... The D&D 3.5 Magic Item Comp. pg 234. chart shows you can add armor bonus to a body slot. And Pathfinder "is 3.75" :) so... up to DM :) but it can be done.
I really don't see the problem with this. As Shuriken said, I'd price the armor bonus as per Bracers of Armor, roll in the Stealth bonus from Cloak of Elvenkind, and voila, your monk has his sneaky/fortified robe. Factor in the +50% cost if you want. Considering he could get everything he's looking for from various existing Wondrous Items, I seriously don't see any problem with rolling them into a single item. Die, Christmas tree, die!
|
|
I don't see any "PAthfinder" only statement so... The D&D 3.5 Magic Item Comp. pg 234. chart shows you can add armor bonus to a body slot. And Pathfinder "is 3.75" :) so... up to DM :) but it can be done.So I've got an odd argument going, and I wouldn’t mind some advice.
I'm in a game where a player is using a Monk's robe with the shadow armor enchant and a +1 ac enchant on it, and I've been trying to tell him that putting armor enchants is impossible...but he keeps arguing to the gm that being an armor, it can have armor enchants...but it isn’t. How do I help clear the air, and tbh I’m not actually sure if I’m right at this point...any thoughts?
For good or for bad, Pathfinder got rid of the affinity for enchantments per slot. So, even if, for the most part belts are physical and headbands are mental, there is nothing restricting them or changing the price of them if you were to make a belt with mental stats.
|
|
There are two different things at play here, the monk loses all his bonuses if he wears armor ( in the armor slot which he is denied, more so than any other class). An armor bonus on an item in the body slot is not armor regardless of the magical enchantment added to the item occupying the slot.
Yah, I know :P There's actually a third thing involved here. And that would be that the player is trying to get around the penalties associated with monks wearing armor without paying the extra costs associated with bracers of armor. It's pretty obvious that's the case. And if he gets away with it in one game, he'll want to do it in future campaigns as well.
1. Custom items don't have to be allowed.
2. Custom item prices are not set by formulas - those are guidelines. The dm is the final arbiter over whether an item can exist and how much it would cost.
3. Getting around the monk armor issue is a pretty valuable thing.
Bracers of armor are capped at +8, take up a wrist spot, and can't have flat gp improvements like shadow. Using a robe which doesn't take up an extra item slot, allowing it to be boosted to +10, and allowing it to benefit from flat bonuses like shadow... that's a pretty substantial improvement over bracers of armor.
However, the magical item creation table has a formula for armor bonus enhancement. It's bonus squared x 1000.
Since the item is NOT armor, and has no armor bonus to enhance, that clearly cannot be the right option.
The only thing that might possibly provide a base armor bonus is ac bonus (other), even though it's described as types like luck, profane, insight, or sacred. That bonus is bonus squared x 2500g.
Now comes the important question. What makes an item armor, as opposed to something with an armor bonus. It's not just having a base armor bonus, because then bracers of armor would count as armor and screw the monk over. I can't imagine that to be the intent. So I'm going to have to go with things that appear in the armor table in equipment, or are otherwise identified as armor.
Since we have a version of wondrous item armor already *bracers of armor*, we know the limitations that it should have. Note that the price for bracers of armor is equal to the price of enchanting a regular suit of armor. Since there are limitations associated with the bracers, I can only assume they were implemented to reduce the cost of the bracers of armor. Which, in turn, suggests that the bracers of armor did use the bonus squared * 2500 cost, and took a discount for the limitations. I wouldn't see much problem in telling the player he can have a robe of armor. However, it would be subject to the exact same limitations as the bracers of armor. No shadow. Max of +8. Gonna have to pay extra for multiple different abilities if he wants it to be a monks robe as well.
If he wants the robe without the +8 cap, and so on, then I would make him pay the bonus squared x 2500. Plus the additional modification of multiple different abilities. And, sure, given the extra cost, if he wants to spend more for shadow, he can. But it's going to be eating that multiplier for multiple different abilities as well.
It's a question of whether you want to balance the item as well as possible, or smack the player upside the head for trying to bypass the restriction in the first place. And that is a very group-specific question :D