|
| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
does a ring of evasion, which grants the evasion ability, function in medium or heavy armor? for paladins in full plate or fighters with armor training that bring heavy armor down to light for purposes of speed? or is the unwritten assumption that the ring grants the ability Evasion (ex), which as its spelled out in every Evasion entry, can only be used while wearing light or no armor?
"which as its spelled out in every Evasion entry, can only be used while wearing light or no armor"
you get the ability as everyone gets it, light or no armor.
|
Nothing is stated in the rings description about armor types...
From the PRD:
Ring of Evasion
Aura moderate transmutation; CL 7th
Slot ring; Price 25,000 gp; Weight —
Description
This ring continually grants the wearer the ability to avoid damage as if she had evasion. Whenever she makes a Reflex saving throw to determine whether she takes half damage, a successful save results in no damage.
Construction
Requirements Forge Ring, jump; Cost 12,500 gp
I would say that it functions as it says, no matter the encumbrance or armor type.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
does a ring of evasion, which grants the evasion ability, function in medium or heavy armor? for paladins in full plate or fighters with armor training that bring heavy armor down to light for purposes of speed? or is the unwritten assumption that the ring grants the ability Evasion (ex), which as its spelled out in every Evasion entry, can only be used while wearing light or no armor?
Heh, good question. The reason it's kind of tricky is because not all classes' evasion abilities work the same. If you look closely, you'll see that while the rogue and monk get evasion in light armor only, the ranger gets it in light or medium armor.
So there are two different armor limitations for evasion in the core rules, and the ring mentions neither.
So... good luck?
|
|
does a ring of evasion, which grants the evasion ability, function in medium or heavy armor? for paladins in full plate or fighters with armor training that bring heavy armor down to light for purposes of speed? or is the unwritten assumption that the ring grants the ability Evasion (ex), which as its spelled out in every Evasion entry, can only be used while wearing light or no armor?
Heh, good question. The reason it's kind of tricky is because not all classes' evasion abilities work the same. If you look closely, you'll see that while the rogue and monk get evasion in light armor only, the ranger gets it in light or medium armor.
So there are two different armor limitations for evasion in the core rules, and the ring mentions neither.
So... good luck?
The ring also does not state that it gives you evasion, but that it lets them avoid damage as if they had evasion, and then goes on to say exactly what it does.
It would be worthless with an armor restriction.
sorry about that answer before, I assumed the ring would just have named evasion. There are different evasions, it isn't clear, you're right.
I would even go so far to say that you can evade in heavy armor. The ring explains evasion, and adding something about armor wouldn't have taken much text.
This brings up another question.
Does armor inhibit the dex bonus to your reflex saves.
If not, should it?
Fist off I think ranger evasion is messed up some how in the conversion. In pathfinder it some how changed from 3.5/3.0 to pathfinder for some reason. The ring doses not say any thing about armor but, it dose not say that it ignore it either. So I would error on the side of caution that it only works light or no armor. It still a great item for it cost.
Fist off I think ranger evasion is messed up some how in the conversion. In pathfinder it some how changed from 3.5/3.0 to pathfinder for some reason. The ring doses not say any thing about armor but, it dose not say that it ignore it either. So I would error on the side of caution that it only works light or no armor. It still a great item for it cost.
Might that be because rangers gained medium armor proficiency in Pathfinder as opposed to 3.5?
|
|
Fist off I think ranger evasion is messed up some how in the conversion. In pathfinder it some how changed from 3.5/3.0 to pathfinder for some reason. The ring doses not say any thing about armor but, it dose not say that it ignore it either. So I would error on the side of caution that it only works light or no armor. It still a great item for it cost.
the ring also does not grant you evasion, just the chance to avoid damage like you had evasion. Since it is not actual evasion, it does not follow the normal rules for evasion, only what is written on in the description for the ring. Do anything else and you are making more work for youself as a DM.
This brings up another question.
Does armor inhibit the dex bonus to your reflex saves.
If not, should it?
No, it does not apply to reflex saves.
Maximum Dex Bonus: This number is the maximum Dexterity bonus to AC that this type of armor allows.
Reflex saves are not armor class.
|
Fist off I think ranger evasion is messed up some how in the conversion. In pathfinder it some how changed from 3.5/3.0 to pathfinder for some reason. The ring doses not say any thing about armor but, it dose not say that it ignore it either. So I would error on the side of caution that it only works light or no armor. It still a great item for it cost.
First of all...grammar, spelling and punctuation will make your point more recognizable.
There are lots of different variations all over the game that give Evasion for different requirements. Evasion is just a description of an ability. In order to use it with the 2 classes named (Rogue and Monk) its specifically to eliminate dipping into those classes for a couple levels in order to gain it on your Fighter or Paladin and then wearing Full Plate.
The variant Phalanx Fighter gains it for having a specific shield on and allows you to grant Evasion or Improved Evasion to an adjacent party member without any restrictions on the other party member.
Assumptions are one thing, but make sure you clarify whether its RAW or RAI.
PS-Ranger Evasion is fine.
No, it does not apply to reflex saves...
That's what I thought.
...
Maximum Dex Bonus: This number is the maximum Dexterity bonus to AC that this type of armor allows.Reflex saves are not armor class.
But doesn't it seem like it should apply to reflex saves? Seems reasonable that heavy plate armor would make it difficult to dodge that lightning bolt.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But doesn't it seem like it should apply to reflex saves? Seems reasonable that heavy plate armor would make it difficult to dodge that lightning bolt.
You'd think. I personally dislike that Reflex and Touch AC are two different things.
If I cast lightning bolt at you, then I only have to aim in your general direction, and my own level doesn't matter. On your end of it, you're uninhibited by armor, your ability to avoid getting hit scales with your level, and is affected by Lightning Reflexes but not Dodge. And even if you successfully avoid it, you still take a glancing hit unless you have evasion.
But if I shoot lightning at you via, say, the cleric's Air Domain power, then it's switched. I have to aim at you, and my ability to hit scales with my level. Meanwhile, your ability to get out of the way is inhibited by armor, doesn't scale with level, and would be affected by Dodge but not Lightning Reflexes. And if you successfully avoid it, you take no damage.
So when I shoot lightning at you, your armor may or may not matter, your level may or may not matter, my level may or may not matter, different feats apply, and different things happen when I miss.
All chosen pretty much arbitrarily.
/rant
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
does a ring of evasion, which grants the evasion ability, function in medium or heavy armor? for paladins in full plate or fighters with armor training that bring heavy armor down to light for purposes of speed? or is the unwritten assumption that the ring grants the ability Evasion (ex), which as its spelled out in every Evasion entry, can only be used while wearing light or no armor?
I would say that if you restricted it to light or no armor, you've got one of the most useless 25000gp magic items ever. There aren't that many light armor classes that don't already get evasion, especially by the time an item of that cost is on the table. It also takes up a valuable ring slot. I just don't think the ring was intended only to be useful to bards, sorcerers, and wizards.
(I know alchemists, summoners, and witches would also get use out of it under this interpretation but as they weren't designed at the time the ring was, I excluded them from my argument.)
Balance argument: by the time PCs are using one of these rings, direct damage isn't really much of a threat anymore anyway. Who cares if the fighter in full plate can take no damage on a successful save(with poor Reflex) when half damage does like 20 of the fighter's 150 hp?
I would say that if you restricted it to light or no armor, you've got one of the most useless 25000gp magic items ever.
Except for the wizard who isn't wearing armor.
Except for the wizard who isn't wearing armor.
I would say that if you restricted it to light or no armor, you've got one of the most useless 25000gp magic items ever.You didn't read the full post Mr Spalding.
"I just don't think the ring was intended only to be useful to bards, sorcerers, and wizards."
Of course -- there is also the free hand cad and unarmed fighter archetypes, gunslingers, holy gun paladins, sea reaver true primitive, and urban barbarians, alchemist, and cloistered clerics.
Oh wait... that's not what you mean is it?
Well that's okay because I actually agree with your position that by RAW the armor doesn't matter since it spells out what it does and doesn't include any references to armor.
This brings up another question.
Does armor inhibit the dex bonus to your reflex saves.
If not, should it?
All armor has a maximum Dex bonus, yes? And so if the dex bonus is less than your total, this in turn affects your reflex save, does it not?
Seems pretty cut and dried to me.
This brings up another question.
Does armor inhibit the dex bonus to your reflex saves.
If not, should it?All armor has a maximum Dex bonus, yes? And so if the dex bonus is less than your total, this in turn affects your reflex save, does it not?
Seems pretty cut and dried to me.
That limitation only applies to AC, not reflex saves.
All armor has a maximum Dex bonus, yes? And so if the dex bonus is less than your total, this in turn affects your reflex save, does it not?
Seems pretty cut and dried to me.
Only if you don't bother to read the rules on what the Maximum Dexterity Bonus entry on armor applies to. Its unambiguously clear that it only applies to AC, not anything else dexterity is added to.
I guess I should have provided quotes.
Maximum Dex Bonus: This number is the maximum Dexterity bonus to AC that this type of armor allows. Dexterity bonuses in excess of this number are reduced to this number for the purposes of determining the wearer's AC. Heavier armors limit mobility, reducing the wearer's ability to dodge blows. This restriction doesn't affect any other Dexterity-related abilities.
Despite what the books say, Reflex saves can't be entirely the ability "to duck, dodge, weave or roll out of the path" of anything. You never leave your square, and being in the middle of a 40' wide sphere of fire means you can't avoid the flames. Instead Reflex saves are only partly about dodging, but are also about things like covering the vulnerable parts of your body in an instant (such as throwing your arms up in front of your face to avoid the intense blast of heat from a fireball, something that armor would have no effect on.)
I could see armor even granting a bonus on the save as well - the layers of padding, metal, and/or leather should provide some protection from area attacks.
Reflex saves aren't about dodging attacks - its about minimizing damage from them somehow. Whether it is actually dodging them, covering the vulnerable parts of your body, turning to minimize the portion of your body exposed, or just sheer dumb luck to avoid the effect.
|
|
This brings up another question.
Does armor inhibit the dex bonus to your reflex saves.
If not, should it?All armor has a maximum Dex bonus, yes? And so if the dex bonus is less than your total, this in turn affects your reflex save, does it not?
Seems pretty cut and dried to me.
No, no, Mr. Fixit (best Hulk ever, btw). While you are absolutely right, and it SHOULD be pretty "cut and dried", you have already seen that there are those who will maintain that is is perfectly sensible to assume that while a suit of full plate armor will impede a fighter's ability to duck, dodge, weave or roll out of the path of a Scorching Ray, that same armor in no way impedes that same fighter's ability to duck, dodge, weave or roll out of the path of a Lightning Bolt.
You can ask them to convey the chain of logic that has lead them to that conclusion if you like, but I shudder at the thought of the responses you will receive (and despair even more at the state of American public education...I would weep for the future if I thought we had one).
I go off my reading comprehension and the RAI/RAW of the devs rather then just snide comments, fluff and no substance.
Anyway, there is something that states that armor can cause problems with reflex saves. In the section under "armor check penalties", it states that if you are not proficient in the armor, then you take that penalty to all dexterity and strength based skill and ability checks.
Remember, if you have proficiency with a type of armor, you are considered to have trained in proper wear, use, and maneuvering in said armor. Also, I have yet to see (and do not have the time to search) for a class with heavy armor proficiency and reflex as a high save.
This brings up another question.
Does armor inhibit the dex bonus to your reflex saves.
If not, should it?All armor has a maximum Dex bonus, yes? And so if the dex bonus is less than your total, this in turn affects your reflex save, does it not?
Seems pretty cut and dried to me.
No, no, Mr. Fixit (best Hulk ever, btw). While you are absolutely right, and it SHOULD be pretty "cut and dried", you have already seen that there are those who will maintain that is is perfectly sensible to assume that while a suit of full plate armor will impede a fighter's ability to duck, dodge, weave or roll out of the path of a Scorching Ray, that same armor in no way impedes that same fighter's ability to duck, dodge, weave or roll out of the path of a Lightning Bolt.
You can ask them to convey the chain of logic that has lead them to that conclusion if you like, but I shudder at the thought of the responses you will receive (and despair even more at the state of American public education...I would weep for the future if I thought we had one).
Whoa, WHOA! Let's keep this civil and keep public education out of it, okay, friend?
I guess I have to concede that, as many have pointed out, the RAW is that only the AC bonus is affected. I personally think being in a big heavy suit of armor would affect how quickly I can react to giant fireballs flying at me, or how quickly I'd respond when SH#% goes down in a fight.
But on the other hand, in spite of my screen name, I'm not a hulking fighter-type who's trained and practiced in the use of armor.
Whoa, WHOA! Let's keep this civil and keep public education out of it, okay, friend?
I don't really see anything uncivil about his post... maybe mildly antagonistic towards hypothetical responses. Then again, that was more of a what-if than anything. I'm chalking this up to the lack of tone for context that text-only communication is often plagued by. It leaves people too quick to see an offense that wasn't meant (or isn't there at all). For the record: I'm speaking fairly dispassionately.
My two cents: I would allow the ring to function regardless of armor. Its a heavy investment in both gold and the valuable ring slot. Besides, as a magic item I have no problem with it helping to guide or push a full-plate fighter out of the way. Not really game breaking.
I think Happler has the right idea in that those who are more prone to wear heavy armor have a lower reflex save progression. Not perfect, but it might be a better way to look at/model the max DEX to AC vs. reflex save discrepancy.
I do agree that the whole scorching ray/lightning bolt analogy makes it look pretty silly. But then again there are no rules for momentum, how gravity affects projectiles, or how the tea prices in Tian affect the battle. Pathfinder isn't exactly the best model for realistic simulations nor does it try to be or need to be.
TL;DR Evasion ring is valuable and should function regardless of armor. Pathfinder isn't perfect.
Whoa, WHOA! Let's keep this civil and keep public education out of it, okay, friend?I don't really see anything uncivil about his post... maybe mildly antagonistic towards hypothetical responses. Then again, that was more of a what-if than anything. I'm chalking this up to the lack of tone for context that text-only communication is often plagued by. It leaves people too quick to see an offense that wasn't meant (or isn't there at all). For the record: I'm speaking fairly dispassionately.
I was responding more to the potential of thread derailment that politics begs for, and the fact that it came out of the blue. And was ostensibly on my side.
Also, I have yet to see (and do not have the time to search) for a class with heavy armor proficiency and reflex as a high save.
Arcane Duelist Bard, and Guntank Gunslinger both have (at some point) heavy armor proficiency and good reflex saves. Paladin's have enough bonuses to save throws to count as having a high reflex save and heavy armor.
Politics! Rage! Wait, were we talking about a magic ring? Angst!
This made me laugh loud enough to wake my roommate.
I was responding more to the potential of thread derailment that politics begs for...
Fair enough, preemptive strike and all that. The thread already seemed derailed what with the talk of nonsensical reflex saves in heavy armor. Still, I'm not used to attempts to diffuse derailments by treating it like it's a charging bull. Seemed like a bit of an overreaction to me. Oh well, internet for ya :P
Back on track, looks like Abraham is right on that one. Well there goes my theory. Still, I don't think a couple of archetypes break anything. I'm alright with martialish characters being awesome. Either way, it looks like most people are okay with the ring ignoring armor restrictions... to answer the original question.
|
|
Arcane Duelist Bard, and Guntank Gunslinger both have (at some point) heavy armor proficiency and good reflex saves. Paladin's have enough bonuses to save throws to count as having a high reflex save and heavy armor.
Also, I have yet to see (and do not have the time to search) for a class with heavy armor proficiency and reflex as a high save.
I am okay with being wrong, as I said, I did not really do a good search at the time. Although to me, those appear to be edge cases, or magic enhanced (aka Paladin).
This brings up another question.
Does armor inhibit the dex bonus to your reflex saves.
If not, should it?All armor has a maximum Dex bonus, yes? And so if the dex bonus is less than your total, this in turn affects your reflex save, does it not?
Seems pretty cut and dried to me.
No, no, Mr. Fixit (best Hulk ever, btw). While you are absolutely right, and it SHOULD be pretty "cut and dried", you have already seen that there are those who will maintain that is is perfectly sensible to assume that while a suit of full plate armor will impede a fighter's ability to duck, dodge, weave or roll out of the path of a Scorching Ray, that same armor in no way impedes that same fighter's ability to duck, dodge, weave or roll out of the path of a Lightning Bolt.
You can ask them to convey the chain of logic that has lead them to that conclusion if you like, but I shudder at the thought of the responses you will receive (and despair even more at the state of American public education...I would weep for the future if I thought we had one).
I can't tell if this is sarcasm, but balance trumps realism and common sense.
example.If you are paralyzed you still get a reflex save(how good you are at quickly moving out of the way), even though you can't move.
Yeah you mentioned it Happler so I felt like looking to see if there were any -- I just posted it for the sake of spreading useless knowledge.
I'm of the opinion that the ring does what it says it does and simply has a unfortunate name that leads to confusion for people that can connect dots.
If you are paralyzed you still get a reflex save(how good you are at quickly moving out of the way), even though you can't move.
Which is why, as I said before, Reflex saves can't be (all) about dodging an attack. If you can somehow succeed on a reflex save without being able to physically move even an inch, wearing armor that slows you down should have no effect at all on your reflex save.
Rangers always had all of the armor proficiencies, they were simply screwed if they wore anything beyond light armor in 3.5.
Nope. Just double checked my book to make sure. Rangers only had light armor proficiency in 3.5.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The ring also does not state that it gives you evasion, but that it lets them avoid damage as if they had evasion, and then goes on to say exactly what it does.
if you had evasion it wouldn't work in heavy armor.
of the four instances of evasion in a classes description text,
rogues, monks, and shadowdancers can only use evasion in light or no armor. rangers can use evasion in light, medium or no armor.
there is no precedent for a character using evasion ability in heavy armor. To me it looks like the ring grants the evasion ability. If you were to then wear heavy armor, you would have the ability of evasion, but be denied use of it.
If a ranger 9, who has the evasion ability were to wear heavy armor, they would still have the class ability. it would be denied to them because they chose to wear heavy armor. I think it could use clarification. Since all other cases of the Evasion ability stipulate a limit based on armor worn.
|
|
if you had evasion it wouldn't work in heavy armor.
of the four instances of evasion in a classes description text,
rogues, monks, and shadowdancers can only use evasion in light or no armor. rangers can use evasion in light, medium or no armor.there is no precedent for a character using evasion ability in heavy armor. To me it looks like the ring grants the evasion ability. If you were to then wear heavy armor, you would have the ability of evasion, but be denied use of it.
If a ranger 9, who has the evasion ability were to wear heavy armor, they would still have the class ability. it would be denied to them because they chose to wear heavy armor. I think it could use clarification. Since all other cases of the Evasion ability stipulate a limit based on armor worn.
Can you please find me a classless based description of evasion for this ring to go off of? Or maybe find where in the rings description it states to give them evasion as if a rogue/monk/ranger/etc...?
The ring states exactly what it does and what limits are imposed for it in it's text. If you want to base it like you say, which class do you go off of?
Your basis leaves too many open questions, rather then just reading and following the description in the ring.
Thinking of this, do you restrict the Phalanx Soldier's ability to grant evasion to only medium or lower armor also?
Shield Ally (Ex): At 9th level, when a phalanx fighter is using a heavy or tower shield, he can, as a move action, provide partial cover (+2 cover bonus to AC, +1 bonus on Reflex saves) to himself and all adjacent allies until the beginning of his next turn.
At 13th level, he can instead provide cover (+4 cover bonus to AC, +2 bonus on Reflex saves) and evasion (as a rogue) to one adjacent ally until the beginning of his next turn. This cover does not allow Stealth checks.
At 17th level, he can provide cover to himself and all adjacent allies, or he can provide improved cover (+8 cover bonus to AC, +4 bonus on Reflex saves, improved evasion) to a single adjacent ally. This ability replaces weapon training 2, 3, and 4.
or what about the capstone ability of a shield fighter:
Shield Ward (Ex): At 20th level, a shielded fighter gains evasion (as a rogue) while wielding a shield, and adds his shield bonus to his AC (not including enhancement bonuses) on Reflex saves and to his touch AC. In addition, his shield cannot be disarmed or sundered. This ability replaces weapon mastery.
It seems evasion should always work unless a limiter is built in such as with the classed versions.
Ring of Evasion is pretty cheap. Is there a ring of improved evasion anywhere? How much should one cost?
P