Wild armor allows you to ignore armor penalties?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 124 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

11 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Traditionally, when under a polymorph effect as a non-humanoid, your armor is melded into you and becomes nonfunctional. You do not suffer penalties from it and you do not gain any bonuses. It essentially ceases to exist.

Wild armor says that, when wild shaped, the armor still melds into you, but you maintain the bonuses.

Does this mean my druid could get a +5 wild stone coat, then wild shape for hours and hours, gaining a +13 bonus to AC (on top of what my form gives me) while not suffering ANY non-proficiency penalties (or other penalties such as armor check penalty, reduced speed, or max Dex) for its use while in said form?

This strikes me as kind of cheesy and kind of awesome, but there doesn't seem to be anything implying it works any other way. If this is really how it was meant to work, it suddenly makes sense why it is so expensive.


Well to be fair, a lot of the skills the penalties are applying to aren't going to be a large deal. But RAW yes.


Ravingdork wrote:

Traditionally, when under a polymorph effect as a non-humanoid, your armor is melded into you and becomes nonfunctional. You do not suffer penalties from it and you do not gain any bonuses. It essentially ceases to exist.

Wild armor says that, when wild shaped, the armor still melds into you, but you maintain the bonuses.

Does this mean my druid could get a +5 wild stone coat, then wild shape for hours and hours, gaining a +13 bonus to AC (on top of what my form gives me) while not suffering ANY non-proficiency penalties (or other penalties such as armor check penalty, reduced speed, or max Dex) for its use while in said form?

This strikes me as kind of cheesy and kind of awesome, but there doesn't seem to be anything implying it works any other way. If this is really how it was meant to work, it suddenly makes sense why it is so expensive.

Yes.

Any other property of the armor (fortification, etc) of course would not function, but there you go.

-James


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Skylancer4 wrote:
Well to be fair, a lot of the skills the penalties are applying to aren't going to be a large deal. But RAW yes.

To be fair, avoiding a -7 penalty to attack rolls, a steep reduction in speed, and the inability to apply any Dexterity bonuses to AC is a big deal. :P


I was talking skills, things like swim, climb, etc that the creature shape grants natural movement with (and so get big bonuses to).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

Traditionally, when under a polymorph effect as a non-humanoid, your armor is melded into you and becomes nonfunctional. You do not suffer penalties from it and you do not gain any bonuses. It essentially ceases to exist.

Wild armor says that, when wild shaped, the armor still melds into you, but you maintain the bonuses.

Does this mean my druid could get a +5 wild stone coat, then wild shape for hours and hours, gaining a +13 bonus to AC (on top of what my form gives me) while not suffering ANY non-proficiency penalties (or other penalties such as armor check penalty, reduced speed, or max Dex) for its use while in said form?

This strikes me as kind of cheesy and kind of awesome, but there doesn't seem to be anything implying it works any other way. If this is really how it was meant to work, it suddenly makes sense why it is so expensive.

Yes. Druids do not need heavy armor proficiency. The heaviest plate mail they can get (either via dragonscale, stone, bone, or whatever) can be made into wild armor and used to buff their AC with no drawbacks or penalties what-so-ever. It's one of the reasons that druids are still very adequate tanks in Pathfinder; because they can stack a ton of natural armor, armor-armor, deflection, and other mods onto their AC.


Ravingdork wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:
Well to be fair, a lot of the skills the penalties are applying to aren't going to be a large deal. But RAW yes.
To be fair, avoiding a -7 penalty to attack rolls, a steep reduction in speed, and the inability to apply any Dexterity bonuses to AC is a big deal. :P

It's a +3 armor enhancement that only works for druids.. it should be!

-James


Ravingdork wrote:
Wild armor says that, when wild shaped, the armor still melds into you, but you maintain the bonuses.

From a strictly gamist point of view, if the Wild Armor does not specifically say it removes armor penalties I see no reason it would.

Taking the penalties for the armor your using is a rule that I do not see specifically superceded by the effect.

If your getting the armors benefits I see no reason not to suffer it's penalties.


RAW says you maintain the bonuses, given that it costs 16000 (+1 wild) I don't see how they aren't paying for the benefit of ignoring the penalties.


Skylancer4 wrote:
RAW says you maintain the bonuses, given that it costs 16000 (+1 wild) I don't see how they aren't paying for the benefit of ignoring the penalties.

I do. It does not explicitly SAY your not getting the penalties as part of the ability. That would be a large advantage to go totally unadressed in the text.

I am a firm beleiver in if it does not say you change a rule then the standard rules still apply.

What your paying for with that 16K is that you still get to use your armor in a situation where you normally would not. Nowhere does it say that you don't have to suffer the armor penalties.


Gilfalas wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:
RAW says you maintain the bonuses, given that it costs 16000 (+1 wild) I don't see how they aren't paying for the benefit of ignoring the penalties.

I do. It does not explicitly SAY your not getting the penalties as part of the ability. That would be a large advantage to go totally unadressed in the text.

I am a firm beleiver in if it does not say you change a rule then the standard rules still apply.

What your paying for with that 16K is that you still get to use your armor in a situation where you normally would not. Nowhere does it say that you don't have to suffer the armor penalties.

RAW, your armor and all effects tied to it become inert when you wild shape. Wild armor creates and exception that you retain the armor bonus (and any enhancement bonus) to AC. Verbatim. It specifically does say you lose the penalties, and then wild says you get the bonuses.

So your firm belief is firmly believing that it is as we said it is.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:

Traditionally, when under a polymorph effect as a non-humanoid, your armor is melded into you and becomes nonfunctional. You do not suffer penalties from it and you do not gain any bonuses. It essentially ceases to exist.

Wild armor says that, when wild shaped, the armor still melds into you, but you maintain the bonuses.

Does this mean my druid could get a +5 wild stone coat, then wild shape for hours and hours, gaining a +13 bonus to AC (on top of what my form gives me) while not suffering ANY non-proficiency penalties (or other penalties such as armor check penalty, reduced speed, or max Dex) for its use while in said form?

This strikes me as kind of cheesy and kind of awesome, but there doesn't seem to be anything implying it works any other way. If this is really how it was meant to work, it suddenly makes sense why it is so expensive.

No it doesn't work that way. With wild armor you essentially now have lumpy skin with all the armor class penalties you had before you wldshaped.


LazarX wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

Traditionally, when under a polymorph effect as a non-humanoid, your armor is melded into you and becomes nonfunctional. You do not suffer penalties from it and you do not gain any bonuses. It essentially ceases to exist.

Wild armor says that, when wild shaped, the armor still melds into you, but you maintain the bonuses.

Does this mean my druid could get a +5 wild stone coat, then wild shape for hours and hours, gaining a +13 bonus to AC (on top of what my form gives me) while not suffering ANY non-proficiency penalties (or other penalties such as armor check penalty, reduced speed, or max Dex) for its use while in said form?

This strikes me as kind of cheesy and kind of awesome, but there doesn't seem to be anything implying it works any other way. If this is really how it was meant to work, it suddenly makes sense why it is so expensive.

No it doesn't work that way. With wild armor you essentially now have lumpy skin with all the armor class penalties you had before you wldshaped.

Thank you so much for your rules citation to clear all of that up LazarX.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

In a rare moment, I agree with Ashiel.

RAW, it seems like you only get the bonuses from wild armor, not the penalties.

RAI, I think you were supposed to get both, but that's not how it was written. So it really just depends on the GM. For PFS play I'm guessing it would be bonuses but no penalties until they add an errata to the PFS rules to cover it.


RAW states the armor bonusses, nothing more nothing less.

This is an old discussion, which tend to break down into how people envision the wild armor flavourwise.
A) Those who see it as either a force field like effect, or something that hardens the skin of the druid, tend to think that the penalties shouldn't apply.
B) Those who see wild armor as something the transforms into barding, tend to think that those penalties should apply.


mdt wrote:

In a rare moment, I agree with Ashiel.

RAW, it seems like you only get the bonuses from wild armor, not the penalties.

RAI, I think you were supposed to get both, but that's not how it was written. So it really just depends on the GM. For PFS play I'm guessing it would be bonuses but no penalties until they add an errata to the PFS rules to cover it.

I love you too mdt. :P

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gilfalas wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:
RAW says you maintain the bonuses, given that it costs 16000 (+1 wild) I don't see how they aren't paying for the benefit of ignoring the penalties.

I do. It does not explicitly SAY your not getting the penalties as part of the ability. That would be a large advantage to go totally unadressed in the text.

I am a firm beleiver in if it does not say you change a rule then the standard rules still apply.

What your paying for with that 16K is that you still get to use your armor in a situation where you normally would not. Nowhere does it say that you don't have to suffer the armor penalties.

The problem is that you're looking at the wrong half of the rules. The polymorph rules state that no (nonmagical) aspect of armor functions while you're polymorphed. Wild armor specifically lets you add the AC bonus, but it doesn't add any other aspect of the armor.

My PFS Druid recently spent 27,600gp (almost all the gold he's earned throughout his career) on +1 Wild Hosteling Dragonhide Fullplate, and not being hit on 3s is worth every penny.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
HaraldKlak wrote:

RAW states the armor bonusses, nothing more nothing less.

This is an old discussion, which tend to break down into how people envision the wild armor flavourwise.
A) Those who see it as either a force field like effect, or something that hardens the skin of the druid, tend to think that the penalties shouldn't apply.
B) Those who see wild armor as something the transforms into barding, tend to think that those penalties should apply.

One of the 3.5 books actually had a painting of wild armor in effect. It basically altered the armor so that it would shape to the animal shape taken, it did not become a magical field of force which gave you all the armor bonuses but suddently lost it's mass and weight to eliminate the penalties. It also makes consistent logic. The armor protects you by maintaining a physical presence. How could that make it's physical properties including the penalties go away?

And Ashiel, you don't have any rules citation to back your otherwise claim.


I agree with Ashiel here.

I also remember a Dev (I think JJ, yes I know not everyone believes what he says) say a while ago that that's indeed how it works, because wild armor is a +3 after all.

If it would just include the penalties again, why bother to buy a +1 wild armor, and not a +4 barding instead and have someone put it on you in wildshape?

So you can use it in normal form? For the price of that +1 wild armor I could buy two sets of +3 armor (well almost), one for my human form that I always wear (and that becomes non functional when shaping) and one I wear then.

So you can wear it in different shapes? Ok that's somewhat worth something, but for that +1 wild armor I can buy 16 (sixteen) sets of +1 armor. Or four sets of +2. Or the above mentioned 2 sets of +3.
I think that covers the most used forms any druid shapes into.

But what about if I have higher enchantment bonuses? Wouldn't I save a lot of money then?
Well true the ratio gets a bit worse there, but let's do the math.
+3 wild armor = 36,000 gp. +3 armor = 9,000. => 4 sets of normal armor
+5 wild armor = 64,000 gp. +5 armor = 25,000 gp. => 2 sets easily, with some leftover for other stuff.
+7 wild armor = 100,000 gp. +7 armor = 49,000 gp => 2 sets.
(+7 meaning total enhancement of +7 not actual +7. +7 being the highest you can have when you put the wild enchantment on it.)

Even then just buying normal armor would be better. Granted you can't get 16 sets anymore, but at that time you can afford it, 2 sets should really be all you need.

So again, if Wild would not remove the penalties, it would be utterly worthless.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quatar wrote:


If it would just include the penalties again, why bother to buy a +1 wild armor, and not a +4 barding instead and have someone put it on you in wildshape?

Because of the rather significant penalty in encumbrance and action economy? Barding is not just something you can throw over an animal, it takes time cinch up, longer than most fights last.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:


One of the 3.5 books actually had a painting of wild armor in effect. It basically altered the armor so that it would shape to the animal shape taken, it did not become a magical field of force which gave you all the armor bonuses but suddently lost it's mass and weight to eliminate the penalties. It also makes consistent logic. The armor protects you by maintaining a physical presence. How could that make it's physical properties including the penalties go away?

And Ashiel, you don't have any rules citation to back your otherwise claim.

Except that she did.

Wildshape makes armor non-functional, removing bonuses and penalties. I think this part is not contested?
Wild enchantment preserves the bonuses.
As it never mentiones penalties, they're still gone.

A 3.5 book has absolutely no place in a PF rules discussion. Maybe it worked like that in 3.5, I don't know and I don't care. It doesn't in PF.

Wild enchantment:
The wearer of a suit of armor or a shield with this ability preserves his armor bonus (and any enhancement bonus) while in a wild shape. Armor and shields with this ability usually appear to be covered in leaf patterns. While the wearer is in a wild shape, the armor cannot be seen.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

There's no need for mentioning the penalties. They're part of the armor, not the enchantment. It is after all possible that you might be using armor with no penalties such as leather or a mithril shirt. The penalties are part of the armor, not the enchantment and the enchantment has no mention of removing them.

General rule in an exception based game, if there is no statement otherwise, status quo applies.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

You don't get the penalties, but you don't get any of the special armor abilities either.

If that armor has an energy resistance ability, it will not apply whilst wildshaped.

In the end, it's a +3 ability, and you get one thing from it, that's it.


I would be with quatar and ashiel on this one, atleast RAW wise.

We could start discussing RAI, but even there im not sure this isnt how it is supposed to work.

atleast thats my 2 cents


Ashiel wrote:
Gilfalas wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:
RAW says you maintain the bonuses, given that it costs 16000 (+1 wild) I don't see how they aren't paying for the benefit of ignoring the penalties.

I do. It does not explicitly SAY your not getting the penalties as part of the ability. That would be a large advantage to go totally unadressed in the text.

I am a firm beleiver in if it does not say you change a rule then the standard rules still apply.

What your paying for with that 16K is that you still get to use your armor in a situation where you normally would not. Nowhere does it say that you don't have to suffer the armor penalties.

RAW, your armor and all effects tied to it become inert when you wild shape. Wild armor creates and exception that you retain the armor bonus (and any enhancement bonus) to AC. Verbatim. It specifically does say you lose the penalties, and then wild says you get the bonuses.

The bolded part is the deciding factor here.

Wild Shape removes the penalty as well as any bonus you get, but using Wild Armor brings back the bonus.
It does not also bring back the penalty, unless you houserule an added clause to the Wild Armor's properties.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
HaraldKlak wrote:

RAW states the armor bonusses, nothing more nothing less.

This is an old discussion, which tend to break down into how people envision the wild armor flavourwise.
A) Those who see it as either a force field like effect, or something that hardens the skin of the druid, tend to think that the penalties shouldn't apply.
B) Those who see wild armor as something the transforms into barding, tend to think that those penalties should apply.

One of the 3.5 books actually had a painting of wild armor in effect. It basically altered the armor so that it would shape to the animal shape taken, it did not become a magical field of force which gave you all the armor bonuses but suddently lost it's mass and weight to eliminate the penalties. It also makes consistent logic. The armor protects you by maintaining a physical presence. How could that make it's physical properties including the penalties go away?

And Ashiel, you don't have any rules citation to back your otherwise claim.

Actually the picture was for a totally different armor in that splat book that did exactly what you claim wild does. It was cheaper and morphed the armor to fit the form instead of melding into the form. It's a +2 enhancement from the previous page called Beastskin. It also requires you to use an extra use of wildshape to activate. It's from the Magic Item Compendium; picture is on page 8, armor ability is on page 7...


LazarX wrote:
Because of the rather significant penalty in encumbrance and action economy? Barding is not just something you can throw over an animal, it takes time cinch up, longer than most fights last.

I know it takes a while to put on.

But +1 wild armor costs 16,000 gp. The first time you can realistically think about getting this is maybe 7th or 8th level, maybe even later.
By that time you can spend pretty much the entire adventuring day (by level 8 actually 24 hours) in wildshape.
You wake up in the morning, shapeshift, have someone dress you. Same as the fighter putting on his armor in the morning.

Also by that time you can invest a few coins into a bag of holding so carrying it isn't that much of an issue either.

LazarX wrote:

There's no need for mentioning the penalties. They're part of the armor, not the enchantment. It is after all possible that you might be using armor with no penalties such as leather or a mithril shirt. The penalties are part of the armor, not the enchantment and the enchantment has no mention of removing them.

General rule in an exception based game, if there is no statement otherwise, status quo applies.

I want to see the druid that willingly slips into a mithral shirt :)

You're right about one thing: The penalties are part of the armor. The actual physical armor. Because it gets in the way and chafes and restricts movement, right? It's not a magical effect in any way, it's purely physical.
Now Wildshape make the armor go away. Meld into your new form. It's gone. Why would those physical hindrances still apply?
Now in comes an enchantment, that with magic makes the bonuses work.

Again, why should it once again affect these physical penalties? The armor itself is still melded. It's still gone. It actually says so in the Wild enchantment I quoted above.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quatar wrote:


Again, why should it once again affect these physical penalties? The armor itself is still melded. It's still gone. It actually says so in the Wild enchantment I quoted above.

Because you need some physical representation to give you the armor bonus. Wild shape doesn't change the armor bonus to a natural armor bonus, it doesn't make it into a force effect, so SOMETHING has to be present to give you that bonus to AC.


Dude, it's magic!


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Did you not read my post?

If Wild Shape removes armor penalties by RAW, then this case is CLOSED.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Nope, there is no precedent for "common sense" when it comes to magic.

The armor does not form to your shape, it melds into your shape.

It's in you, but not apparent from the outside.

It notes that it cannot be seen in the description.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Icyshadow wrote:

Did you not read my post?

If Wild Shape removes armor penalties by RAW, then this case is CLOSED.

Wild shape removes the penalties by totally removing the armor. The Wild enchantment brings the armor back. It makes absolutely no mention of removing the penalties. Taking that description literally makes absolutely no sense.

An armor class bonus is protetion by a physical effect. If that effect is not a force effect, than some physical presence is required. Unfortunately the rules text does not make the matter clear so I'm going to utter those dread words again that all rule lawyers hate....

It is up to GM interpretation. The rules text gives no solid conclusion either way. I make my call based on my general approaches to GMing magical effects. I rule on the side of caution, strictness, and verisimilitude.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:

Did you not read my post?

If Wild Shape removes armor penalties by RAW, then this case is CLOSED.

Wild shape removes the penalties by totally removing the armor. The Wild enchantment brings the armor back. It makes absolutely no mention of removing the penalties.

No it doesn't bring the armor back, by RAW it only bribngs back the bonus.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Christopher Van Horn wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:

Did you not read my post?

If Wild Shape removes armor penalties by RAW, then this case is CLOSED.

Wild shape removes the penalties by totally removing the armor. The Wild enchantment brings the armor back. It makes absolutely no mention of removing the penalties.
No it doesn't bring the armor back, by RAW it only bribngs back the bonus.

So where does the bonus come from if the armor is not present.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
Christopher Van Horn wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:

Did you not read my post?

If Wild Shape removes armor penalties by RAW, then this case is CLOSED.

Wild shape removes the penalties by totally removing the armor. The Wild enchantment brings the armor back. It makes absolutely no mention of removing the penalties.
No it doesn't bring the armor back, by RAW it only bribngs back the bonus.
So where does the bonus come from if the armor is not present.

That's easy.

Magic.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
Christopher Van Horn wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Icyshadow wrote:

Did you not read my post?

If Wild Shape removes armor penalties by RAW, then this case is CLOSED.

Wild shape removes the penalties by totally removing the armor. The Wild enchantment brings the armor back. It makes absolutely no mention of removing the penalties.
No it doesn't bring the armor back, by RAW it only bribngs back the bonus.
So where does the bonus come from if the armor is not present.

It comes from the enhancement itself, the quote doesn't even state the armor bonus comes back. The exact quote for wild armor is:

"Wild: The wearer of a suit of armor or a shield with this ability preserves his armor bonus (and any enhancement bonus) while in a wild shape."

This means the armor goes the bonus stays because of wild, no bringing it back in the first place. It might have been better to preserve the armor check (as was eventually ruled for animated tower shields) but so far it has not been.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Animated Shields still provide their other abilities, whilst Wild armor does not.

This is one of the drawbacks.

If you need help imagining it, think of it as an invisible magic aura that makes you more difficult to hit.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Animated Shields still provide their other abilities, whilst Wild armor does not.

This is one of the drawbacks.

If you need help imagining it, think of it as an invisible magic aura that makes you more difficult to hit.

I agree with you, I'm saying I prefer the rule where the armor check and speed reduction are there over not. It was a preference not an argument.


This may be a stupid question, but where is the RAW for armor penalties disappearing in the first place. Here's what seems to be the relevant quote from polymorph:

Quote:
When you cast a polymorph spell that changes you into a creature of the animal, dragon, elemental, magical beast, plant, or vermin type, all of your gear melds into your body. Items that provide constant bonuses and do not need to be activated continue to function while melded in this way (with the exception of armor and shield bonuses, which cease to function).

Neither Beast Shape nor Wild Shape comment on this.

It would make make sense that the penalties go away along with the armor bonus, since the armor melds with you, but is it RAW?

Also, as I read that you always get any enhancement bonus from the armor, just not the armor bonus. +2 Hide would give +6 in humanoid form, +2 wild shaped.

And as the Wild armor property says:

Quote:
While the wearer is in a wild shape, the armor cannot be seen.

If the armor isn't there, it makes sense it doesn't hamper. I suppose it could be read as transforming into invisible barding.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

I was simply stating the reasoning behind the lack of penalty.

Should you choose to houserule otherwise, I would allow the other abilities to remain present.

This would mean that you have a Pathfinder version of the Beastskin enchantment, and not the Wild enchantment though.


Wild specifically states:

Quote:
Wild: The wearer of a suit of armor or a shield with this ability preserves his armor bonus (and any enhancement bonus) while in a wild shape. Armor and shields with this ability usually appear to be covered in leaf patterns. While the wearer is in a wild shape, the armor cannot be seen.

It doesn't do anything else. It doesn't provide penalties. It doesn't let you keep all the benefits either like slick or shadow or fortification. It only let's you keep the armor bonus and the enhancement bonus. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Ashiel is right.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bob_Loblaw wrote:

Wild specifically states:

Quote:
Wild: The wearer of a suit of armor or a shield with this ability preserves his armor bonus (and any enhancement bonus) while in a wild shape. Armor and shields with this ability usually appear to be covered in leaf patterns. While the wearer is in a wild shape, the armor cannot be seen.

It doesn't do anything else. It doesn't provide penalties. It doesn't let you keep all the benefits either like slick or shadow or fortification. It only let's you keep the armor bonus and the enhancement bonus. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Ashiel is right.

Ashiel isn't "right", but he's not necessarily "wrong". Both of us are making inferences and drawing conclusions from text. There is no conclusive support for either position, Just as there is nothing that states armor penalties are retained, there isn't anything that states they are dispensed with. It's not directly addressed by text, what Ashiel and I are both doing are making inferences from what's there. If you actually find a text that directly states the effect of the Wild enchantment on the armor penalties then we'd have a definite statement.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

NPC statblocks of wildshaped druids with Wild armor do not show armor check penalties whilst in Wildshape.

Why would normal polymorph rules not apply?

It is still melded, but the Armor bonus remains.

Melded armor does not incur armor check penalties.


LazarX wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:

Wild specifically states:

Quote:
Wild: The wearer of a suit of armor or a shield with this ability preserves his armor bonus (and any enhancement bonus) while in a wild shape. Armor and shields with this ability usually appear to be covered in leaf patterns. While the wearer is in a wild shape, the armor cannot be seen.

It doesn't do anything else. It doesn't provide penalties. It doesn't let you keep all the benefits either like slick or shadow or fortification. It only let's you keep the armor bonus and the enhancement bonus. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Ashiel is right.

Ashiel isn't "right", but he's not necessarily "wrong". Both of us are making inferences and drawing conclusions from text. There is no conclusive support for either position, Just as there is nothing that states armor penalties are retained, there isn't anything that states they are dispensed with. It's not directly addressed by text, what Ashiel and I are both doing are making inferences from what's there. If you actually find a text that directly states the effect of the Wild enchantment on the armor penalties then we'd have a definite statement.

Now you're asking for a text directly stating it doesn't do something. That's rare. How many other things does the Wild property not do?

And a text directly stating anything about Armor Check penalties and polymorphing/wild shape would be nice too.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

So, now we are saying normal melded armor incurs armor check penalties?


LazarX wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:

Wild specifically states:

Quote:
Wild: The wearer of a suit of armor or a shield with this ability preserves his armor bonus (and any enhancement bonus) while in a wild shape. Armor and shields with this ability usually appear to be covered in leaf patterns. While the wearer is in a wild shape, the armor cannot be seen.

It doesn't do anything else. It doesn't provide penalties. It doesn't let you keep all the benefits either like slick or shadow or fortification. It only let's you keep the armor bonus and the enhancement bonus. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Ashiel is right.

Ashiel isn't "right", but he's not necessarily "wrong". Both of us are making inferences and drawing conclusions from text. There is no conclusive support for either position, Just as there is nothing that states armor penalties are retained, there isn't anything that states they are dispensed with. It's not directly addressed by text, what Ashiel and I are both doing are making inferences from what's there. If you actually find a text that directly states the effect of the Wild enchantment on the armor penalties then we'd have a definite statement.

How is this not conclusive? There is nothing to infer. The text says exactly what benefits the enhancement provides. That's all it provides. What other interpretation is there that could reasonably use the information provided? Remember that the only two things you can have is the armor bonus and enhancement bonuses. There is nothing to even suggest that there is any other adjustment.


thejeff wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:

Wild specifically states:

Quote:
Wild: The wearer of a suit of armor or a shield with this ability preserves his armor bonus (and any enhancement bonus) while in a wild shape. Armor and shields with this ability usually appear to be covered in leaf patterns. While the wearer is in a wild shape, the armor cannot be seen.

It doesn't do anything else. It doesn't provide penalties. It doesn't let you keep all the benefits either like slick or shadow or fortification. It only let's you keep the armor bonus and the enhancement bonus. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Ashiel is right.

Ashiel isn't "right", but he's not necessarily "wrong". Both of us are making inferences and drawing conclusions from text. There is no conclusive support for either position, Just as there is nothing that states armor penalties are retained, there isn't anything that states they are dispensed with. It's not directly addressed by text, what Ashiel and I are both doing are making inferences from what's there. If you actually find a text that directly states the effect of the Wild enchantment on the armor penalties then we'd have a definite statement.

Now you're asking for a text directly stating it doesn't do something. That's rare. How many other things does the Wild property not do?

And a text directly stating anything about Armor Check penalties and polymorphing/wild shape would be nice too.

From the PRD under Polymorph:

Quote:
When you cast a polymorph spell that changes you into a creature of the animal, dragon, elemental, magical beast, plant, or vermin type, all of your gear melds into your body. Items that provide constant bonuses and do not need to be activated continue to function while melded in this way (with the exception of armor and shield bonuses, which cease to function). Items that require activation cannot be used while you maintain that form. While in such a form, you cannot cast any spells that require material components (unless you have the Eschew Materials or Natural Spell feat), and can only cast spells with somatic or verbal components if the form you choose has the capability to make such movements or speak, such as a dragon. Other polymorph spells might be subject to this restriction as well, if they change you into a form that is unlike your original form (subject to GM discretion). If your new form does not cause your equipment to meld into your form, the equipment resizes to match your new size.

The gear melds into your body. It doesn't actually have a physical form for you to use anymore. Just like a bag of holding can't be used if it melds into the body (it may or may not depending on the form you take).


blackbloodtroll wrote:
So, now we are saying normal melded armor incurs armor check penalties?

I'm not saying anything. I'd assumed it didn't. When I went to look, I couldn't find anything that said that. I hoped someone could point out to me where it did.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

To state there are armor check penalties still present, is to say the armor is not melded.

This contradicts the rules.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
blackbloodtroll wrote:

NPC statblocks of wildshaped druids with Wild armor do not show armor check penalties whilst in Wildshape.

Why would normal polymorph rules not apply?

It is still melded, but the Armor bonus remains.

Melded armor does not incur armor check penalties.

Most NPC druids are wearing leather armor which doesn't have any penalties to show.

1 to 50 of 124 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Wild armor allows you to ignore armor penalties? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.