|
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.
Effectively - yes. But it's like the difference between a court decision & a new law.
For the court decision (or FAQ) they're letting you know that's what the law/rule always actually said, and anyone who was reading it differently was wrong. (And it can change things retroactively.)
For a new law/errata - they're actually changing the law/rule to be something different, though in both cases it's often in an attempt to do what they were intending in the first place. (Only applies from this point forward.)
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
countless GM's agree that Wild Shields don't work as written
ten people with 5 stars, even more VO's
I'm hesitant to say you are confused.
How about I ask if they told you that it didn't work?
Because I'd be shocked if a single 4 or 5 star GM says +1 Wild Heavy Wooden Shield doesn't provide +3 Shield AC while Wild Shaped. If they did, they are not doing what is expected.
I'm not concerned with someone saying in a pedantic way "it doesn't work RAW". That is another matter.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well.
Paizo jumped the shark on this one by including Mistmail. I love Paizo, I love the work they do, but this is a bad call, a bad ruling, and comes from a bad place.
How does a cloud of mist apply a Max Dex penalty? How do you suffer arcane spell failure from a cloud of mist? How do you suffer an armor check penalty from armor you aren't wearing?
This is a terrible errata masquerading as FAQ. It's not supported by logic, not required for game balance, and is so completely counter-intuitive that making the mental leap requires you to completely and utterly suspend your understanding of how the item works. I get Wild. I do not get Mistmail. It's tacked onto the end like they're afraid someone's going to break the game by wearing a cloud of mist which doesn't apply an armor bonus in their armor slot.
I'm disappointed in you, PDT. You guys are so frequently awesome, but you've made a mistake here.
I just noticed this FAQ. It seems fair to me. Monk/Druids can still have decent AC in wildshape without spending lots of gold on Wild armor, especially if they've got friends with Mage Armor. I'd like to see max Dex added to the official FAQ too.
@LazarX - I remember an illustration like the one you mentioned, but the one I recall was for a different and less expensive enchantment which I think might have been called "Beastskin".
I just noticed this FAQ. It seems fair to me. Monk/Druids can still have decent AC in wildshape without spending lots of gold on Wild armor, especially if they've got friends with Mage Armor. I'd like to see max Dex added to the official FAQ too.
@LazarX - I remember an illustration like the one you mentioned, but the one I recall was for a different and less expensive enchantment which I think might have been called "Beastskin".
Wilding clasps where only 4000gp.
@graystone - I think you're referring back to the old 3.5 Wilding Clasp. If so I agree it was a very cheap item for what it did (probably too cheap)
@graystone - I think you're referring back to the old 3.5 Wilding Clasp. If so I agree it was a very cheap item for what it did (probably too cheap)
Yep, 3.5. I was jumping off your Beastskin reference. [It was a +2 enchant that pretty much does what it does now]
If what he's saying is true, then it's simply just a really bad case of regional table variation.
Thats ridiculous. The enchant specifically calls out that it works with shields too. (and might be the most optimal use left for this enchant)
@The Morphling - Do you have a PC with Mistmail who is affected by the FAQ, or does it just bother you as some sort of "matter of principle"?
@The Morphling - Do you have a PC with Mistmail who is affected by the FAQ, or does it just bother you as some sort of "matter of principle"?
Can't it be both? ;)
For me it's a logic issue. Melding stops most things from working, it seems odd that a +3 item grants mostly penalties for it's cost. Why would special materials matter for melded items? (ei: darkleaf)
|
|
For me it's a logic issue. Melding stops most things from working, it seems odd that a +3 item grants mostly penalties for it's cost. Why would special materials matter for melded items? (ei: darkleaf)
I'm sorry - but there's at least as much logic for it to matter as it not to matter.
By your logic - it wouldn't matter whether it was padded armor or full plate for how much it protected you either. Why would it? It's melded anyway! Magic!
For me it's a logic issue. Melding stops most things from working, it seems odd that a +3 item grants mostly penalties for it's cost. Why would special materials matter for melded items? (ei: darkleaf)I'm sorry - but there's at least as much logic for it to matter as it not to matter.
By your logic - it wouldn't matter whether it was padded armor or full plate for how much it protected you either. Why would it? It's melded anyway! Magic!
You seem to be jumping over the cost. That's factored into how useful the magic is. At that level, I'd think more positive than negative is warranted IMO. The way it's described not, it makes more sense to have it not meld and it just shifts with you.
So before, I saw it as granting the equivalent of the AC bonus from the armor and not actually giving you part of the armor. Pseudo melding like the FAQ never entered my mind. That's why materials would be meaningless. After all, do you get a DR from quilted armor melded with you? It's make as much sense to get that as it does ACP's. Magic!
|
Magic designed to do (and doing) the exact opposite of what this FAQ entails.Magic?
How does a cloud of mist apply a Max Dex penalty? How do you suffer arcane spell failure from a cloud of mist? How do you suffer an armor check penalty from armor you aren't wearing?
I'd argue that per the FAQ, you are wearing the Mistmail when it becomes a cloud, and retain it's Armor Bonus even when it is transformed. After all, it doesn't say it stops providing those bonuses when it transforms into fog.
The cost has nothing to do with how a magic item works. It only factors into whether or not you think it's worth buying.
You seem to be jumping over the cost. That's factored into how useful the magic is.
If raw is ambiguous the power vs cost issue is going to come up, which oddly enough brings up the price..
Well.
Paizo jumped the shark on this one by including Mistmail. I love Paizo, I love the work they do, but this is a bad call, a bad ruling, and comes from a bad place.
How does a cloud of mist apply a Max Dex penalty? How do you suffer arcane spell failure from a cloud of mist? How do you suffer an armor check penalty from armor you aren't wearing?
This is a terrible errata masquerading as FAQ. It's not supported by logic, not required for game balance, and is so completely counter-intuitive that making the mental leap requires you to completely and utterly suspend your understanding of how the item works. I get Wild. I do not get Mistmail. It's tacked onto the end like they're afraid someone's going to break the game by wearing a cloud of mist which doesn't apply an armor bonus in their armor slot.
I'm disappointed in you, PDT. You guys are so frequently awesome, but you've made a mistake here.
by the same token how does mist grant you armor, how does armor absorbed into your polymorph grant you AC?
also a number of people already rules it this way.
honestly with already having natural armor stacked on top i think it's fine with losing 3 armor off the total for what it does.
barding is cheaper though, and keeps you in the same animal shape pretty much.
The cost has nothing to do with how a magic item works. It only factors into whether or not you think it's worth buying.
You seem to be jumping over the cost. That's factored into how useful the magic is.
+3 items should be more powerful than +2 items and they should be more powerful than +1's. It's a pretty common paradigm in the game. Higher level things should be more powerful than lower ones. If the cost seems clearly off, it's an indication something's off.
Another example is not being able to make an item that gives permanent mage armor and true strike as the effect costs too little for the effect. Cost most definitely is linked to how magic items work.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
As it is now, it has holes, causes confusion, and does not imply the intent that the FAQ presents us. The whole damn ability needs to be rewritten. That's all there is to it.
If something is melded into your body, why is it slowing it down?
Does your heart slow you down? Your own weight? Rule wise you could weight a ton and still move at 30 ft, so how does something that makes part of you slow you down.
The Wild magic property only lets you add it's Armor and any Enhancement bonus, it never states that ACP and others will carry along. Is that a fair assumption? If so, then DEVs should errata the Wild enchantment and make it clear, not everyone takes the time to read every single FAQ/Rule.
If the armor melds and it's no longer functioning with no +3 Wild, why would it slow you down to add Armor bonus. From a logic perspective it doesn't make any sense, you can't argue with that. You don't get slow down by your own weight or something that makes part of you.
I'll take it now Dwarf Druids are much more interesting, they never get slowed down.
honestly with already having natural armor stacked on top i think it's fine with losing 3 armor off the total for what it does.
barding is cheaper though, and keeps you in the same animal shape pretty much.
I'd say same general shape. If you're a Saurian Shaman, a suit of fitting barding should be fine for Compsognathus, Velociraptor and Tyrannosaurus as they have the same body shape and only really differ in size.
I'll take it now Dwarf Druids are much more interesting, they never get slowed down.
Also don't forget some people are going to read this' "Flying mounts can't fly in medium or heavy barding", and not allow druids to fly in medium+ armor.
I'll take it now Dwarf Druids are much more interesting, they never get slowed down.Also don't forget some people are going to read this' "Flying mounts can't fly in medium or heavy barding", and not allow druids to fly in medium+ armor.
Exactly. It's a huge problem now because of its ramifications. Best option? Put fortification on a Heavy Shield made of Darkwood or something, and just get a wand of Mage Armor and someone will cast it on you.
The difference is 3 AC. But now I can fully enjoy buffs to DEX, movement and zero penalty to every skill that matters for a wildshape
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If something is melded into your body, why is it slowing it down?
why does it give you armor?
just pointing out that this explanation isn't a good argument, obviously it does something non-conventional.
If something is melded into your body, why is it slowing it down?why does it give you armor?
just pointing out that this explanation isn't a good argument, obviously it does something non-conventional.
Because you ENCHANTED IT! Like the property says?
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.
Read again. It says I PRESERVE the Armor Bonus + Any Enhancement bonus.
Now, read Wild Shape Polymorph
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)
Oh yes, you could argue that only the Armor Bonus cease to function, not its limitations, if that's so, why wasn't more clear? Anyone reading this would rule out that Armor are gone in wildshape
If something CEASES to function, it's total value on everything is ZERO. Now, if the Wild Enchant allows you to PRESERVE in constrast to CEASE, it's LOGIC to assume that only the Armor Bonus is transported to your wildshape and nothing else.
Nowhere in the ruling on Both the Wild Enchant nor the Polymoprh subschool does it says you carry penalty and other limitations. Please provide something besides the FAQ stating this, you won't find it.
|
|
...argument...
I'm sorry - but you are reading a lot of things which are grey as either black or white in order to come to the conclusions that you want to.
I'm not saying that they're inherently wrong conclusions. (Though obviously Paizo disagrees.) Just that they're not the only reasonable & valid conclusions.
If something is melded into your body, why is it slowing it down?why does it give you armor?
just pointing out that this explanation isn't a good argument, obviously it does something non-conventional.
My logic is that it wasn't giving you your old armor bonus but giving a new bonus to armor equal to your old amount. It makes more sense to me than special materials affecting your melded item in some ways (ACP) but not others (DR for quilted).
If something is melded into your body, why is it slowing it down?why does it give you armor?
just pointing out that this explanation isn't a good argument, obviously it does something non-conventional.
Because you ENCHANTED IT! Like the property says?
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.
Read again. It says I PRESERVE the Armor Bonus + Any Enhancement bonus.
right and how can you "logically" see armor giving it's preserved bonus other than not still being armor in some way? i'm saying that, you can't rely on the presumed armor being melded into you not giving any penalties because it "doesn't make sense", since the enhancement itself does not actually make much sense. *end of my point on this specific argument*
###SEPARATE###
Many people including me already rules it worked that way, and don't feel any new rules were created, only clarified.
Might as well that no matter the enchant you retain the penalty to everything always. That makes more sense for this ruling
Might as well that no matter the enchant you retain the penalty to everything always. That makes more sense for this ruling
this might come off as harsh or mean but i'm not trying to insult you just trying to get you out of this rut of thinking...
but i think you are being obstinate and sticking to a black or white fallacy. Obviously the ability in question had a limited word count and apparently the devs thought that this ability made it as if you were still wearing the armor but not actually wearing it. obviously if you absorb the armor it ceases to count as you wearing it, thus you do not gain the ACP or other penalties.
this might come off as harsh or mean but i'm not trying to insult you just trying to get you out of this rut of thinking...
but i think you are being obstinate and sticking to a black or white fallacy. Obviously the ability in question had a limited word count and apparently the devs thought that this ability made it as if you were still wearing the armor but not actually wearing it. obviously if you absorb the armor it ceases to count as you wearing it, thus you do not gain the ACP or other penalties.
I'm trying to figure out how the Wild Enchant is now useful. I don't get it.
If I'm understanding correctly if your armor is +1 Fortification doesn't work on Wildshape.
I'm cool with penalties, movement and such, but for the cost it's an item you won't be getting until level 10 probably when armor doesn't really matter that much anymore. At that point i'm better off with Cloak of Displacement (crafted) or Spells that mirror it. I do not see the benefits of getting such a relative expensive item.
If I keep the Fortification of a +1 Armor Fort, than, that's an entirely different thing, otherwise I'm better off buying other types of AC.
this might come off as harsh or mean but i'm not trying to insult you just trying to get you out of this rut of thinking...
but i think you are being obstinate and sticking to a black or white fallacy. Obviously the ability in question had a limited word count and apparently the devs thought that this ability made it as if you were still wearing the armor but not actually wearing it. obviously if you absorb the armor it ceases to count as you wearing it, thus you do not gain the ACP or other penalties.
I'm trying to figure out how the Wild Enchant is now useful. I don't get it.
If I'm understanding correctly if your armor is +1 Fortification doesn't work on Wildshape.
I'm cool with penalties, movement and such, but for the cost it's an item you won't be getting until level 10 probably when armor doesn't really matter that much anymore. At that point i'm better off with Cloak of Displacement (crafted) or Spells that mirror it. I do not see the benefits of getting such a relative expensive item.
If I keep the Fortification of a +1 Armor Fort, than, that's an entirely different thing, otherwise I'm better off buying other types of AC.
think of it as allowing you to stack the natural armor from your wildshape onto your armor, by giving up 3 enhancement bonuses.
obviously compared to barding this saves time, space and money from having multiple armors, in most cases barding should be prefered but if you're a versatile shifter than you may want wild.
basically, this changed it from a must have to something that is a decent boon, which i think it a better balancing point for enhancements.
|
|
I'm cool with penalties, movement and such, but for the cost it's an item you won't be getting until level 10 probably when armor doesn't really matter that much anymore. At that point i'm better off with Cloak of Displacement (crafted) or Spells that mirror it. I do not see the benefits of getting such a relative expensive item.
1. The cloak of displacement uses up your shoulder slot - so no cloak of resis. It's also defeated by true seeing - which starts to be semi-common by 10-12.
Not to mention that even a cloak of minor displacement cost a good deal more than Wild armor - a regular cloak of displacement costs more than 3x as much. +4 Wild armor is a hair cheaper than a Cloak of Displacement - and still doesn't use up the shoulder slot.
2. The advantages of miss chance vs AC is one which has been discussed many times. Basically - the more AC you already have, the bigger advantage of further AC vs miss chance. And frankly - even with the new Wild, with the nat armor druids get when wild-shaping, a druid's AC is still trumps that of a two-handed martial's by several points even if your game doesn't allow Wild shields.
3. Other forms of AC have their uses, but the more places it comes from - the cheaper it gets.
If I keep the Fortification of a +1 Armor Fort, than, that's an entirely different thing, otherwise I'm better off buying other types of AC.
4. I don't think I'd ever put fortification on my armor until it was already at +5 anyway - so that's mostly moot.
What are you talking about?
the increased NA that druids get is almost completely counteracted by the increased DEX penalty the druid gets in those forms WITH the higher NA.
|
|
What are you talking about?
the increased NA that druids get is almost completely counteracted by the increased DEX penalty the druid gets in those forms WITH the higher NA.
Only if you're bad at math.
Large animal: If the form you take is that of a Large animal, you gain a +4 size bonus to your Strength, a -2 penalty to your Dexterity, and a +4 natural armor bonus.
Huge animal: If the form you take is that of a Huge animal, you gain a +6 size bonus to your Strength, a -4 penalty to your Dexterity, and a +6 natural armor bonus.
Large magical beast: If the form you take is that of a Large magical beast, you gain a +6 size bonus to your Strength, a -2 penalty on your Dexterity, a +2 size bonus to your Constitution, and a +6 natural armor bonus.
In the case of the large animal - the size/dex penalty total to -2 AC with +4 NA - net +2 AC
In the case of the huge animal - the size/dex penalty total to -4 AC with +6 NA - net +2 AC
In the case of the large magical beast - the size/dex penalty total to -2 AC with +6 NA - net +4 AC
In every case - it's a significant net positive to AC.
And that doesn't include cases where your normal dex bonus is higher than your armor's max dex bonus before your shift. (common at high levels)
Only if you're bad at math.
you could be a bit less abrasive.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Obviously the ability in question had a limited word count and apparently the devs thought that this ability made it as if you were still wearing the armor but not actually wearing it. obviously if you absorb the armor it ceases to count as you wearing it, thus you do not gain the ACP or other penalties.
Obviously??? Paizo didn't write the WILD property. They straight up copy pasted it from D&D 3.5 / the SRD. In 3.5 the armor most certainly did not do what PAIZO is saying it does in the FAQ response. What they are describing in the response was offered as a separate armor property you could purchase for +2 called Beastskin.
But lets humor you for a moment regarding your point of word count. lets see....
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.
378 characters.
Armor with this special ability usually appears to be made from magically hardened animal pelt covered in leaf patterns. Suits of armor or shields with this ability change shape and size to properly fit you while in a wild shape. While the wearer is in a wild shape, the armor cannot be seen.
292 characters.
Obviously the ability in question had a limited word count and apparently the devs thought that this ability made it as if you were still wearing the armor but not actually wearing it. obviously if you absorb the armor it ceases to count as you wearing it, thus you do not gain the ACP or other penalties.Obviously??? Paizo didn't write the WILD property.
even if they copy pasted it, they still wrote it with their own beliefs on how the ability functions.
as for the the 2nd point, the armor isn't still worn on you, it only effectively is.
Only if you're bad at math.
In the case of the large animal - the size/dex penalty total to -2 AC with +4 NA - net +2 AC
In the case of the huge animal - the size/dex penalty total to -4 AC with +6 NA - net +2 AC
In the case of the large magical beast - the size/dex penalty total to -2 AC with +6 NA - net +4 AC
Druids don't get Magical Beast wildshapes. they are limited to animals, plants or elementals. so we are looking at usually a +2 AC (and -2 Touch AC)
Elementals have better payout in terms of armor - but they also have much fewer attacks and damage output... so you know... balance...
i don't really understand any of this, it still lets you put your armor on top of the armor you gain from wildshaping...
even if they copy pasted it, they still wrote it with their own beliefs on how the ability functions.
what is "it"? the thing they copy and pasted because they saw no reason to change it? or is "it" the FAQ response? Regardless - its a change to the rules and should be addressed as Errata.
as for the the 2nd point, the armor isn't still worn on you, it only effectively is.
Are you sure about that?
I am a druid, I have wild armor on. I can feel it - it hampers my movement. It weighs me down. It makes me feel slow. Now I Wildshape into a wolf. I roll over, and look down at my belly all i see is my fur. But i still feel weighed down. I still feel slower than usual. I still feel like its restricting my movement. In every way, it FEELS like i am still wearing the armor...
Is the armor actually there and i just cannot see it? Or, has it completely melded into my body like that cheap suit of armor i used to have... except that cheap suit of armor didn't hamper my movements in any way... it didn't slow me down. That is weird...I paid a lot of money for this special druid armor... why is it slowing me down? I think the wizard duped me. He only told me that the protection the armor provided me would magically still exist when i changed form... but i think all he did was enchant it with a Fitting property, and a trigger action activated greater invisibility enchantment that only affects the armor itself... That's weird...