Wild Armor

[David_Bross]

I was just going over the PRD and found some things which I feel need addressing with wild armor.

from PRD
"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."
from polymorph
"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)."

Obviously the intent is that wild armor melds into your gear and still provides an Armor or Shield bonus, as the enchant can also be placed on shields. I have a few questions regarding this enchant on armor.

1) Does the ACP or speed reduction apply? I would argue no as it is melded into your form, but it'd be nice for official clarification

2) It says that only things that do not need to be activated continue to function. Thus if you had +1 wild spell-storing hide armor, it would not be able to trigger, as it is not a constant bonus.

3) For that matter technically by this language bracers of armor shouldn't work either, but assuming that is an over site, would +1 spell-storing bracers of armor similarly not be able to trigger while in your polymorphed form.

[David_Bross]

Anyone?

[Nefreet]

I originally thought that perhaps Bracers of Armor +1 would continue to function, since they provided a constant bonus, but being as it is an armor bonus I suppose they do not. Given that, +1 Spell Storing Bracers of Armor certainly would do you no good.

I would not think that ACP or speed reduction would apply, since the armor melds into your new form, but that is just going off of the statement from polymorph, nothing else.

[Troubleshooter]

I'd seen a quote from somebody that the speed reduction and ACP didn't apply. I was kind of rankled at that, since my player was wearing dragonhide full plate he wasn't proficient with but it didn't penalize him in wild shape.

[BigNorseWolf]

1) Does the ACP or speed reduction apply? I would argue no as it is melded into your form, but it'd be nice for official clarification

James Jacobs said no.

This was a large part of the reason its a +3 bonus.

2) It says that only things that do not need to be activated continue to function. Thus if you had +1 wild spell-storing hide armor, it would not be able to trigger, as it is not a constant bonus.

Yup.

3) For that matter technically by this language bracers of armor shouldn't work either, but assuming that is an over site, would +1 spell-storing bracers of armor similarly not be able to trigger while in your polymorphed form.

Bracers of armor work just fine. They don't need to be activated, just worn.

Spell storing bracers likewise wouldn't work.

Either way, if you're a melee druid you're probably better off picking one combat form like the velociraptor and getting yourself barding made for it.

[David_Bross]

I saw the JJ reply, which is inconsistent as he says the non-proficency should still apply, but all that does is apply ACP penalty to attack rolls, which shouldn't apply as the ACP is taken as a no.

As for numbers 2 and 3. That makes sense, and It'll probably make sense to get barding made for the combat form, which makes a good deal of sense. Almost feels like I need UMD and a wand of unseen servent at that point though.

[Nefreet]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Bracers of armor work just fine. They don't need to be activated, just worn.

As the OP pointed out above, "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)."

Armor bonuses cease to function, which is exactly the type of bonus that Bracers of Armor provide.

If Polymorph had instead stated, "Bonuses from wearing armor or carrying a shield are no longer applied", then Bracers of Armor would work just fine.

I suppose that negates a Ring of Force Shield, too.

[mplindustries]

You could just shift and then have your friends clamp some bracers on--that's what I intend to do until I can afford Wild armor.

[Pathfinder Design Team]

Answered in FAQ!

FAQ wrote:

Wild armor and other transforming armor: When I use a wild armor and gain the armor’s benefits, what restrictions, if any, apply to me? In general, when I transform with a polymorph effect and some of my gear melds into the form, what restrictions do I have for melding with large amounts of heavy gear? What about other types of transforming armor?

If you were in medium or heavy load from encumbrance before transforming, you continue to take those penalties in your melded form. Otherwise, ignore the weight of melded items and calculate your encumbrance in your polymorphed form entirely based on non-melded items. When wearing melded armor and shields, if you gain no benefit from the melded armor, you still count as wearing an armor of that type, but you do not suffer its armor check penalty, movement speed reduction, or arcane spell failure chance. If you do gain any benefits (as with the wild property), then you do suffer the armor check penalty, movement speed reduction, and arcane spell failure chance. This also applies to all other situations where you or an armor transform: you always count as wearing an armor of that type, and if you gain any benefit at all from the armor (such as mistmail), you apply the armor check penalty, movement speed reduction, and arcane spell failure chance.

[Charon's Little Helper]

Pathfinder Design Team wrote:

Answered in FAQ!

FAQ wrote:

Wild armor and other transforming armor: When I use a wild armor and gain the armor’s benefits, what restrictions, if any, apply to me? In general, when I transform with a polymorph effect and some of my gear melds into the form, what restrictions do I have for melding with large amounts of heavy gear? What about other types of transforming armor?

If you were in medium or heavy load from encumbrance before transforming, you continue to take those penalties in your melded form. Otherwise, ignore the weight of melded items and calculate your encumbrance in your polymorphed form entirely based on non-melded items. When wearing melded armor and shields, if you gain no benefit from the melded armor, you still count as wearing an armor of that type, but you do not suffer its armor check penalty, movement speed reduction, or arcane spell failure chance. If you do gain any benefits (as with the wild property), then you do suffer the armor check penalty, movement speed reduction, and arcane spell failure chance. This also applies to all other situations where you or an armor transform: you always count as wearing an armor of that type, and if you gain any benefit at all from the armor (such as mistmail), you apply the armor check penalty, movement speed reduction, and arcane spell failure chance.

Thank you. This is the ruling I always went with - but it's nice that people will no longer be able to try for the wildshaped druid with Wild Full-Plate / Tower Shield - and being proficient with neither.

[Cheapy]

I also appreciate going further back for some of the FAQs. For a while, it felt like whatever the hot button issue of the week was the one that got the FAQ. (Although I double checked this, and it was just an issue of perception. There was actually a good mix!)

Thanks!

[Captain Netz]

Considering most people I know default to one transformation and air walk, I think this is a dead option for most people now.

[Sithis of Fangwood]

It'll certainly cut down on the number of Druid/Monks out there.

[Imbicatus]

Sithis of Fangwood wrote:

It'll certainly cut down on the number of Druid/Monks out there.

Not really, they just will have to rely on Bracers or a wand of mage armor like single-class monks.

[Charon's Little Helper]

Imbicatus wrote:

Sithis of Fangwood wrote:

It'll certainly cut down on the number of Druid/Monks out there.

Not really, they just will have to rely on Bracers or a wand of mage armor like single-class monks.

Did anyone actually rule that they got their Wis to AC in addition to Wild armor/shield? Ugh. I never saw anyone go that far.

[Chess Pwn]

I feel that's what the rules had said, you're no longer wearing armor so you get the monk AC

[Charon's Little Helper]

Chess Pwn wrote:

I feel that's what the rules had said, you're no longer wearing armor so you get the monk AC

Except... they didn't. And now I have the FAQ to prove it.

[James Risner]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Did anyone actually rule that they got their Wis to AC in addition to Wild armor/shield? Ugh. I never saw anyone go that far.

I ran it that way in my games (PFS and otherwise).

I've seen uncountable optimized characters at yearly GenCon PVP tournament running that way.

I've seen uncountable optimized characters at yearly DragonCon Cheesegrinder PVE/PVP tournament.

It is a different FAQ than I expected. I'll run with it, it seems a fine way now that we know how it is supposed to work.

[Jeff Morse]

If you do gain any benefits (as with the wild property), then you do suffer the armor check penalty, movement speed reduction, and arcane spell failure chance. This also applies to all other situations where you or an armor transform: you always count as wearing an armor of that type, and if you gain any benefit at all from the armor (such as mistmail), you apply the armor check penalty, movement speed reduction, and arcane spell failure chance.

Speed: Medium or heavy armor slows the wearer down. The number in the Armor and Shields table is the character's speed while wearing the armor. Humans, elves, half-elves, and half-orcs have an unencumbered speed of 30 feet. They use the first column. Dwarves, gnomes, and halflings have an unencumbered speed of 20 feet. They use the second column. Remember, however, that a dwarf's land speed remains 20 feet even in medium or heavy armor or when carrying a medium or heavy load.
So a wildshaped druid, in medium or heavy armor is limited to only 20 feet speed now? Tell me I am only tired and not getting this, please

[Archaeik]

Jeff Morse wrote:

So a wildshaped druid, in medium or heavy armor is limited to only 20 feet speed now? Tell me I am only tired and not getting this, please

There is a table under Additional Rules regarding the adjustment for base speeds higher than 30 (which many forms offer).

Magic:Polymorph wrote:

Your base speed changes to match that of the form you assume.

Keep in mind this will only apply if you have the Wild property on your armor.

[Jeff Morse]

Thanks, didnt know where to find that since never use it.

[Jeff Merola]

If you don't want to have to reference the table all the time, the speed reduction for medium and heavy armor is 2/3 base, round up to nearest 5' increment.

[Taenia]

Thank you Mark and PDT for getting this out. As a follow up are bracers of armor intended to work wild shape/polymorph since it seems to be limiting physical armor properties and not magical ones.

Also I assume max Dex is in effect for wild armor?

[Pathfinder Design Team]

Yes, max Dex also applies, along with the others.

[Avoron]

Thank you, this FAQ clears a lot of things up.
I have a couple of follow-up questions about the section of the FAQ that says

FAQ wrote:

you still count as wearing an armor of that type

1. Does this cause the standard properties of the armor to take affect, such as a tower shield's penalty to attack rolls, quilted cloth's DR, or shocking grasp's bonus against targets in metal armor?

2. Does this allow characters to use abilities such as the feat Missile Shield while their armor and shield are melded?

3. If a character is wearing a set of armor that melds into their form during wild shape, does this prevent them from putting on a new set of armor while transformed?

Finally, I assume that "gaining a benefit from the armor" should be interpreted as broadly as possible, including things such as the brawling armor enchantment, quilted cloth's DR (if applicable, see question 1), and the ability to use Missile Shield (if applicable, see question 2). Am I correct, or is there a different way to determine whether a character counts as receiving a benefit from the armor?

[Nefreet]

"Armor of that type" is the key to takeaway.

Quilted Cloth's DR, the -2 attack penalty for holding a Tower Shield, and even Shocking Grasp have nothing to do with an Armor's type (light/medium/heavy).

Things that would be affected include movement reduction, the Defender of the Society Trait, and having to save versus a hot environment (plus others, I'm sure).

[Avoron]

Hmm. It seems that this is even less clear than I thought.

The word "type" could very well mean what you said - that you count as wearing light armor, medium armor, heavy armor, or a shield.

However, I took it to mean something different: that you count as wearing armor of that specific sort - for example, quilted cloth, hide, stoneplate, or a tower shield. And if I understood it differently, other people might too.

Why I am Confused:

For weapons, the word "type" often has a very definite meaning: bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing (although it also sometimes refers to an individual weapon).

For armor, however, there is much less certainty. The Core Rulebook's section on Armor uses the word "type" 7 times, and every single time it is clear that it is referring to the individual item of armor (e.g. quilted cloth). This definition of "type" is used 5 other times throughout the equipment section and several more times throughout the Core Rulebook.

There are only a few places in the Core Rulebook that refer to a "type" of armor as light, medium, or heavy.
The price tables in the Special Materials section do, sort of (but there other "types" include "weapons," "ammunition," and "other items").
The "Benefit" section of the Light Armor Proficiency feat does, sort of (but the standard section on armor proficiency in the Equipment chapter does not).
The paladin weapon and armor proficiency section does (but the NPC class weapon and armor proficiency sections are ambiguous and the rest of the weapon and armor proficiency sections don't mention "type" at all).

It's a surprisingly confusing term.

Anyway, if this question can be answered conclusively, it will clear up all of the previously mentioned confusion:

Does the phrase "you still count as wearing an armor of that type" in this FAQ response use the word "type" to refer to individual sorts of armor (e.g. studded leather) or to the armor's categorization as light, medium, or heavy?

Regardless of the answer to this question, the answers to my third and fourth questions are still unclear.

[Charon's Little Helper]

Nefreet wrote:

"Armor of that type" is the key to takeaway.

Quilted Cloth's DR, the -2 attack penalty for holding a Tower Shield, and even Shocking Grasp have nothing to do with an Armor's type (light/medium/heavy).

Things that would be affected include movement reduction, the Defender of the Society Trait, and having to save versus a hot environment (plus others, I'm sure).

I disagree entirely. Especially for Tower Shield - as it is it's own shield type - even requiring a separate proficiency.

[Alexander Nudd]

I got super excited about this, because I thought you were about to fix Wild Shields, but you didn't.

Those of you that keep talking about Wild Tower Shields need to first realize that by RAW they don't actually do anything currently.

Wild reads "Armor with this special ability usually appears to be made from magically hardened animal pelt. 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."

The issue with this is that shields don't have armor bonuses, they just have shield bonuses. Any chance we can add into this ruling that Wild lets a shield bonus work as well?

[Naal]

I don't think the shield issue is anything sinister. It is probably nothing more than the devs thinking there was a clear similarity in how wild armors and shields work. Does anyone know of a GM who ever ruled that a +3 equivalent special power from the Core book would do nothing?

For a while I wondered if the FAQ would imply that a free hand/limb was necessary to "wield" the wild shield, since wild armor applied some restrictions to movement. Then I read the last sentence of the description and my brain started working again. While the wearer is in a wild shape, the armor cannot be seen would imply there are no localized shield-sized extrusions of bone, bark, or chitin that had to be interposed like a shield. Instead the shield melds evenly across the entire form. Plus animals like sharks and snakes could not benefit from wild shield under that interpretation. In my opinion this would also make a melded wild shield impossible to bypass with some options (like Sliding Axe Throw feat), though others (like Pinpoint Targeting feat) would still work.

Would shield-related feats (Covering Shield, Missile Shield, Ray Shield, etc.) work with melded wild shields? Probably not, since you are not actually using/wielding a shield. This is mostly theoretical, since I have not seen a druid PC with shield feats, and multiclass fighter/druid seems to be a rare beast.

Weapon Finesse is probably affected. When using a +1 wild heavy wooden shield, you would get +3 AC but also -2 to attacks if you rely on Weapon Finesse for attack.

Last; are there any shapeshifting armors that work for arcane casters? Wild armor only works for wild shape.

[Alexander Nudd]

Every PFS GM would rule that way, since that's what RAW says.
I bought the shield on my druid, and it's been sitting around useless ever since I realized that Wild wasn't worded properly, thanks to a friend pointing it out.

Shield focus would certainly still work, but those others are weird indeed. I think by RAW they work, but flavor wise they don't make any sense since the shield is melded.

Weapon Finesse probably would take negatives still as well. That being said, I had no idea that clause was even in weapon finesse, but that's fine since my finesse guy that uses shields has a mithral buckler anyway which doesn't have an ACP.

I don't personally know of any armors that work for casters while polymorphed, except for the obvious effects that just give an armor bonus that aren't armor. (Bracers of Armor, Mage Armor, etc.)

[James Risner]

Alexander Nudd wrote:

Every PFS GM would rule that way, since that's what RAW says.

What way?

If you are saying PFS GM's would rule your +1 Wild Heavy Wooden Shield doesn't give you +3 shield AC when Wild Shaped, then no. Every PFS GM I've seen including myself would correctly implement the rules as written to provide shield bonus when applied to a valid target: a shield.

PFS requires running as RAW means "don't make up your own house rules". Not "be pedantic and run things clearly not as written or intended because you can to be a meanie".

[Alexander Nudd]

It is clearly written that Wild gives you the items armor bonus and nothing else (until this FAQ added ACP, Spell Failure, Max Dex and movement speed reduction). Shields don't give an armor bonus, but rather a shield bonus. So currently they don't do anything. Rules as Intended it's quite clear that Wild Shields should give a shield bonus, by RAW, they don't.

[Azten]

How something can meld with your form perfectly, no longer even existing but become flesh/bone/whatever and still slow you down is incredibly weird and not worth anything more than a +1. Certainly not +3!

[Charon's Little Helper]

Azten wrote:

How something can meld with your form perfectly, no longer even existing but become flesh/bone/whatever and still slow you down is incredibly weird and not worth anything more than a +1. Certainly not +3!

I don't know what you're talking about. Wild is still really good for a wild-shape focused druid.

[Stompy Rex]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

Azten wrote:

How something can meld with your form perfectly, no longer even existing but become flesh/bone/whatever and still slow you down is incredibly weird and not worth anything more than a +1. Certainly not +3!

I don't know what you're talking about. Wild is still really good for a wild-shape focused druid.

It definitely is. Comparing this response and the finer differences of the FAQ however, house-ruling it to +2 wouldn't be out of order. Wild should not go below that, but neither does it quite feel like a +3 any longer.

+2 sounds "about right."

But I need to think on it.

[Azten]

I'm not saying it's not good. I'm saying it doesn't make sense and isn't worth a +3 for it.

[Nefreet]

Alexander Nudd wrote:

It is clearly written that Wild gives you the items armor bonus and nothing else (until this FAQ added ACP, Spell Failure, Max Dex and movement speed reduction). Shields don't give an armor bonus, but rather a shield bonus. So currently they don't do anything. Rules as Intended it's quite clear that Wild Shields should give a shield bonus, by RAW, they don't.

Then it's good that there's no such thing as "RAW".

The game falls apart with such silly shenanigans. Luckily, in PFS, GMs are given leeway to ignore extremely pedantic literal interpretations such as this.

You can bring your +1 Wild Shield to any table I GM.

I'd hope that you allow the same courtesy to anyone playing at your tables.

[James Risner]

Nefreet wrote:

I'd hope that you allow the same courtesy to anyone playing at your tables.

+1

[Charon's Little Helper]

Azten wrote:

I'm not saying it's not good. I'm saying it doesn't make sense and isn't worth a +3 for it.

And I'm disagreeing entirely. For a wild-shape focused druid - it's totally worth +3.

You're stacking armor on what would be a decent build without it. With Wild armor they have the best AC in the game. (a monk may be competitive - no one else)

As to 'making sense' - the armor weighing you down when transformed makes as much sense as it still protecting you when transformed.

[My Self]

Nefreet wrote:

Alexander Nudd wrote:

It is clearly written that Wild gives you the items armor bonus and nothing else (until this FAQ added ACP, Spell Failure, Max Dex and movement speed reduction). Shields don't give an armor bonus, but rather a shield bonus. So currently they don't do anything. Rules as Intended it's quite clear that Wild Shields should give a shield bonus, by RAW, they don't.

Then it's good that there's no such thing as "RAW".

The game falls apart with such silly shenanigans. Luckily, in PFS, GMs are given leeway to ignore extremely pedantic literal interpretations such as this.

You can bring your +1 Wild Shield to any table I GM.

I'd hope that you allow the same courtesy to anyone playing at your tables.

By RAW, all Clerics/Paladins/Rogues/Ninjas/Witches/Sorcerers/Oracles/Gunslingers/Swashb ucklers/Arcanists/Hunters/Shamans/Inquisitors have to be women, or else you can't use any class feature that refers to the character by "she" or similar feminine pronouns.

[Alexander Nudd]

There are a lot of abilities that people think clearly should work, but just simply don't as written. It's an unfortunate side effect of our game, especially when the person running any given table isn't afforded the luxury of modifying the rules as it is in an organized play system. Sadly what is obvious to one person isn't to the next guy, so PFS GM's generally take the most literal interpretation.

Another example that is pretty cut and dry is Daring Champion Cavalier, who gets the Precise Strike deed for free but doesn't have a swashbuckler level so that doesn't do anything either. This example can also be easily extended further to the magus Arcane Deed that lets you take Precise Strike but similarly doesn't do anything as written.

Assuming the first works just because that makes sense, extends onto the second example and there have been countless threads arguing if the latter works, all coming to the conclusion but by how it is written it certainly doesn't and no one even knows the intent in that case unlike with these Wild Shields.

If it were in my home game, I unquestionably would interpret wild shields as I believe they were intended. As well as Daring Champion and Arcane Deed for Precise Strike counting your cavalier or magus level respectively as your swashbuckler level for the purposes of Precise Strike damage. PFS isn't my homegame though, so we rely on these Friday FAQ's and new printings to address issues such as these.

I check the Pathfinder Design Team post religiously on Fridays, and have been very happy with the work Mark and anyone else involved has been doing to clear up ambiguities.

Sorry for the thread derailment, I was earnestly trying to get an issue resolved that I figured would be a no brainer "Yes, wild lets shield bonuses apply as well". Back to rejoicing (or grimacing) over changes to Wild Armor that has long been a point of contention!

[Gisher]

Nefreet wrote:

Alexander Nudd wrote:

It is clearly written that Wild gives you the items armor bonus and nothing else (until this FAQ added ACP, Spell Failure, Max Dex and movement speed reduction). Shields don't give an armor bonus, but rather a shield bonus. So currently they don't do anything. Rules as Intended it's quite clear that Wild Shields should give a shield bonus, by RAW, they don't.

Then it's good that there's no such thing as "RAW".

The game falls apart with such silly shenanigans. Luckily, in PFS, GMs are given leeway to ignore extremely pedantic literal interpretations such as this.

You can bring your +1 Wild Shield to any table I GM.

I'd hope that you allow the same courtesy to anyone playing at your tables.

The post you linked to is excellent! I will take your advice to heart and try to stop using the "RAW" terminology.

[James Risner]

Alexander Nudd wrote:

person running any given table isn't afforded the luxury of modifying the rules as it is in an organized play system.

I was earnestly trying to get an issue resolved

You simply don't understand the "PFS GM must run RAW" assertion. You are taking it as "PFS GM must clearly violate the rules, logic, and consistency for sport to be a meanie".

If you are trying, try not to make a big deal out of a non-issue. There are plenty of real issues like Overrun that could use some help.

[Gisher]

Alexander Nudd wrote:

Another example that is pretty cut and dry is Daring Champion Cavalier, who gets the Precise Strike deed for free but doesn't have a swashbuckler level so that doesn't do anything either. This example can also be easily extended further to the magus Arcane Deed that lets you take Precise Strike but similarly doesn't do anything as written.

I'm pretty sure that these issues haven't been addressed in the FAQ's because they have been addressed in the errata that we should be getting in the next week or so.

[Ravingdork]

Aren't FAQs supposed to be for clarifications, not new rules?

Azten wrote:

How something can meld with your form perfectly, no longer even existing but become flesh/bone/whatever and still slow you down is incredibly weird and not worth anything more than a +1. Certainly not +3!

I wholeheartedly agree. I may never see wild armor again. Instead, it will be replaced by far cheaper barding.

[Alexander Nudd]

I certainly agree that overrun could use some help James and more things are more pressing. I only pointed it out since the design team was actively working with the Wild enchantment this week and it has caused me considering consternation.

It seems we must live in entirely different gaming worlds though. I've had countless GM's agree that Wild Shields don't work as written when I specifically asked them about it. This includes at least ten people with 5 stars, even more VO's and a couple of people with campaign service awards. It's been my experience at something like 400 tables of PFS I've participated in that the vast majority of GM's operate that way, and thus I asked for a clarification so I could enjoy my high level druid a little more with a nifty wild shield. (Although, I guess I'd need to sell it and buy a new one anyway since the current one is a tower shield and I don't want to take the -2 to hit if that applies now even if I took proficiency)

Which I guess raises another question, assuming Wild Shields do work as they should. Would tower shield users take that -2 to hit with a melded Wild Tower Shield?

Yes, I agree Gisher. I am eagerly awaiting an errata on that particular book. It was just an example of clear cut RAI, just like the Wild Shield issue. I hadn't heard that it was coming very soon though, that's great to hear!

[Gisher]

Ravingdork wrote:

Aren't FAQs supposed to be for clarifications, not new rules?

I've seen people write this a lot, but I'm not clear how that distinction is supposed to work. If one person thinks a rule works one way and someone else thinks it works in a different way, it seems to me that any clarification will result in at least one of them effectively having a new rule.

[Gisher]

Alexander Nudd wrote:

Yes, I agree Gisher. I am eagerly awaiting an errata on that particular book. It was just an example of clear cut RAI, just like the Wild Shield issue. I hadn't heard that it was coming very soon though, that's great to hear!

We have been promised by Erik Mona that it will be out by the beginning of GenCon which starts on July 30. One of Mark Seifter's comments suggested that they didn't want it to be a last minute thing, so my suspicion is that we will get it this week. Having the new ACG arrive at the same time as Occult Adventures would seem a bit much.

[Bandw2]

Chess Pwn wrote:

I feel that's what the rules had said, you're no longer wearing armor so you get the monk AC

man i never even thought to do this (specifically i would have gone with the without wild armor version)