Proving it is easy. If you hit the robes with a rod of cancellation or a disjunction what you have is normal clothes with an armor bonus of zero. The robes don't provide an armor bonus of 5 because of their physical construction. Ergo they are providing an armor bonus because of anunnamed magical effect that is like either a mage armor or a magic vestment effect. In either case, the magic vestment spell would not stack with either.What the magic and the spells both provide is an enhancement to an armor bonus to armor class.You have yet to prove the robes are providing this. They specifically say armor bonus, and the spell used in their creation says armor bonus. You can keep repeating it, but until can prove that Paizo either used the wrong spell for the purpose of creating the robes or the robes just have a typo it wont matter.
Just because it isn't innate doesn't mean it is an enhancement bonus. Prove that it is specifically an enhancement bonus then they won't stack.
Proving it is easy. If you hit the robes with a rod of cancellation or a disjunction what you have is normal clothes with an armor bonus of zero. The robes don't provide an armor bonus of 5 because of their physical construction. Ergo they are providing an armor bonus because of anunnamed magical effect that is like either a mage armor or a magic vestment effect. In either case, the magic vestment spell would not stack with either.What the magic and the spells both provide is an enhancement to an armor bonus to armor class.You have yet to prove the robes are providing this. They specifically say armor bonus, and the spell used in their creation says armor bonus. You can keep repeating it, but until can prove that Paizo either used the wrong spell for the purpose of creating the robes or the robes just have a typo it wont matter.
Magic has no limits in PF. You are just making assumptions. If magic can make force provide an armor bonus with one spell, and give a shield bonus with another spell, then I see no reason why it can't give robes an armor bonus.
You are assuming the armor bonus must be physical. There is also nothing saying the robe benefits from the force based armor bonus that mage armor provides, and even if it did, it could just be said the effect is a part of the robes, and while it act like mage armor, it is not mage armor.You now have to prove that magic can not give an armor bonus to AC without changing the physical construction of the item or providing a force type effect.
So far you have proved nothing. All you did was put your own personal limitation on magic.
The robes say they provide a Armor bonus, not an enhancement bonus to armor. Magic Vestment give an enhancement bonus to armor. So technically they should stack no problem.
Great logic... but the premise is flawed. Magic Vestment provides an enhancement to an Armor Class Bonus. Not some unique kind of enhancement that's distinct from an armor bonus to armor class.
And again there is no such thing as an enhancement bonus to armor class. What the magic and the spells both provide is an enhancement to an armor bonus to armor class. The distinction is the whole story.
From the PRD under Magic Armor:
"In general, magic armor protects the wearer to a greater extent than nonmagical armor. Magic armor bonuses are enhancement bonuses, never rise above +5, and stack with regular armor bonuses (and with shield and magic shield enhancement bonuses). All magic armor is also masterwork armor, reducing armor check penalties by 1."This here say there are enhancement bonuses to to the Armor Class that armor provides. I'm not sure what you mean by there is no distinct bonus to the armor bonus that armor gives. Are you saying that the enhancement bonus is a bonus that is generic and you can never have more than +5 no matter what the enhancement bonus applies to? So for example if you had a +2 Breast plate and +5 amulet of natural armor you could on get a max of +5 not +7?
|
What the magic and the spells both provide is an enhancement to an armor bonus to armor class.
So there is no difference... both of "the spells" (Magic Vestment and Mage Armor) AND Robes of the Archmagi provide "an enhancement to an armor bonus"?
So, someone wearing leather armor who had Mage Armor cast on them would then get the 'enhancement' bonus from the spell added to the 'armor' bonus of the leather?
Of course, this directly contradicts the text of the spell. It says that the spell provides an "armor" bonus and therefor does not stack with physical armor. In contrast, Magic Vestment says that it provides an "enhancement" bonus and thus DOES stack with an armor bonus, but not with any other enhancement bonus of that armor.
No matter how much you rail against it there clearly IS a distinction between "armor" bonuses and "enhancement" bonuses. If a character somehow has two "armor" bonuses they only receive the higher of the two. If a particular set of 'armor' has two "enhancement" bonuses applied to it only the higher will operate.
However, an "armor" bonus and an "enhancement" bonus applied to that armor DO stack. Thus, barring an error in the text, the only question is whether the "enhancement" bonus provided by Magic Vestment can be applied to the "armor" bonus created by Robes of the Archmagi (or Mage Armor). That is a valid question for debate. Whether "armor" and "enhancement" bonuses are different is not.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
Just my two cents...
Bob the Beguiler is wearing a robe of the archmagi, and wants a bit of extra protection. His cleric friend, Wendy the Warder wants to cast Magic Vestment. Can we enchant it?
Target armor or shield touched
Aww... Looks like Bob is out of luck, since the robes are definitely not a shield or suit of armor. But wait!
An outfit of regular clothing counts as armor that grants no AC bonus for the purpose of this spell.
An exception! YES WE CAN!
Robes count as 'regular clothing', because it doesn't take any special training (proficiency) to wear robes, any more than a loincloth, a bikini, a tuxedo, or a furry snowsuit.So Wendy the Warder waves wildly and voilà! magic vestment has been cast on Bob the Beguiler's bodacious bedclothes! But wait! Bob is no more protected now than he was before the spell.
Remember that specific trumps general when it comes to spells, and this spell is *very specific*:
An outfit of regular clothing counts as armor that grants no AC bonus for the purpose of this spell.
Bob's robe of the archmagi might as well have been his bathrobe. Being an outfit of regular clothing, the spell magic vestment specifically treats his robes as armor that grants no AC bonus, giving him a +5 armor bonus (Armor bonus = 0+5 enhancement). He already has an equal or greater armor bonus from another source (the robe's +5 armor bonus) which supersedes the spell's effects.
What I'm saying is that the enhancement is to the armor bonus, not a direct enhancement to armor class itself. The robes of the archmagi give an armor bonus to AC when all is said and done. There is no such thing as a separate enhancement bonus to AC the enhancment is always to an armor bonus, not to the Armor Class value itself. If you wear +5 platemail, you're not getting an Armor Bonus and and Ehhancement Bonus to AC, you're getting a single enhanced Armor Bonus to AC.
Of course it is. That's how it works. But that's not what I was getting from your posts. Sounded like you were saying there is no such thing and enhancement bonus to armor or shields. That's what had me confused.
So I agree. You have an armor bonus which can be enhanced by enhancement bonus granting a larger Armor AC bonus. Same with shields. Clear enough.
So scale mail give you base Armor AC bonus of 5 and you can enhance the armor's AC bonus by up to +5 to get an armor AC bonus of 10 max. So you have Robes of the archmagi that give you Armor AC bonus of 5, why can't you enhance this Armor AC bonus up to +5 the same as the Scale Mail? Since both are Armor Bonuses then both should be able to enhanced the same way.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
An outfit of regular clothing counts as armor that grants no AC bonus for the purpose of this spell.Bob's robe of the archmagi might as well have been his bathrobe. Being an outfit of regular clothing, the spell magic vestment specifically treats his robes as armor that grants no AC bonus, giving him a +5 armor bonus (Armor bonus = 0+5 enhancement). He already has an equal or greater armor bonus from another source (the robe's +5 armor bonus) which supersedes the spell's effects.
I think your reading too much into this. No where does it state that you can treat a piece of clothing that has an armor bonus as if it didn't.
It does say that you can treat clothing as armor for the purpose of this spell. And that that clothing, which does not give you any AC bonus, is treated as armor with an AC bonus of 0.
If you distill down the problem you come to this:
Is robe of the archmagi considered regular clothing? It is not armor or a shield (those are specific slots that the robe does not take up). The robe takes up the body slot (which is meant for robes and vestments) so in one manner the answer is yes it is clothing. However, the robe is a wondrous item and thus could be considered to not be "regular."
RAW - I would rule that no, you can not put magic vestment of the robe of the archmagi because it is not regular clothing.
RAI - I would home rule that you could do it. Reasoning: (1) Any character wearing armor can use magic vestment to bump there AC bonus, so we are not preventing anything game breaking. (2) The wizard can not wear any other item that grants AC if wearing the robe and so can not use magic vestment on anything else because he would then have two AC granting items that would not stack. 3) The robe is clothing (just not regular) and so is pretty darn close to being RAW anyway.
I think the horse is dead.
What I'm saying is that the enhancement is to the armor bonus, not a direct enhancement to armor class itself.
We have already agree with you on this. Why do you keep repeating as if we don't?
We are saying the armor bonus is improved upon by the magic vestment spell by by RAW. We are not saying there is an enhancement bonus that applies directly to AC. I have repeated this and even linked to a post where I described it. What is it that you I wrote that is making that hard to understand?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's make this simple.
Full plate +9 armor bonus & Mage Armor +4 armor bonus do not stack
Full plate +9 armor bonus & Magic Vestment +4 enhancement bonus DO stack
Ergo, Mage Armor and Magic Vestment are DIFFERENT and your statement that both spells (and Robes of the Archmagi) provide "an enhancement to an armor bonus" is incorrect. That is how Magic Vestment works. It is NOT how Mage Armor works. It is also not how Robes of the Archmagi work, unless the description saying they provide an "armor" bonus is erroneous.
There may be other 'spell targeting' reasons that Magic Vestment cannot be stacked onto Robes of the Archmagi, but your claim that the AC effects of the two are exactly the same is demonstrably false.
for anyone who's interested, i've had a talk to my DM and he's decided to allow it... unless it's declared void by an FAQ, of course.