Is the effect from Sleeves of Many Garments illusory or transmutive?

[Dave Justus]

blackbloodtroll wrote:

I will still use this, just with minor houserules in home games.

Does this actually hide the clothes underneath?

Say, I have a Cold Weather Outfit on, and use the Sleeves to look like I am wearing nothing but a loincloth, does that work?

My understanding is that your cold weather outfit will now look like just a loincloth. However, that doesn't necessarily mean you will look like you are wearing nothing but a loincloth. For example, I don't believe it will disguise the fact that you are wearing platemail as well.

Magical clothing items, like belts, robes, vests is more questionable as to whether they would count as part of your clothing for this or as separate items.

[Gauss]

Mark Seifter wrote:

Gauss wrote:

I do not understand why they do not get a save if they interact with the glamered object. Glamer has no special wording to state there is no will save to disbelieve. In fact, there are a number of glamer spells with a will save to disbelieve.

The glamered weapon and armor properties, however, do mention it.

Thats what I get for not checking the weapon and armor properties. Thanks

[blahpers]

Chengar Qordath wrote:

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Ah, but it doesn't say it can provide a bonus.

Generally, Pathfinder is a permissive game.

It's much easier for DM to say a listed bonus doesn't apply, due to circumstance, than to say an unlisted bonus does apply, due to circumstance.

This is much more true in PFS, when being conservative is usually the best route.

A PFS Judge that is suspected of player favoritism, can lead to very uncomfortable situations.

I think that is a fair point to raise. While the transmutation vs. illusion issue was cleared up, the item is still going to be prone to a lot of table variation. That probably can't be helped, though. Not without making the item entry a lot longer and/or changing the disguise rules.

Can't be helped? That isn't a bug; it's a feature.

[DominusMegadeus]

blahpers wrote:

Chengar Qordath wrote:

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Ah, but it doesn't say it can provide a bonus.

Generally, Pathfinder is a permissive game.

It's much easier for DM to say a listed bonus doesn't apply, due to circumstance, than to say an unlisted bonus does apply, due to circumstance.

This is much more true in PFS, when being conservative is usually the best route.

A PFS Judge that is suspected of player favoritism, can lead to very uncomfortable situations.

I think that is a fair point to raise. While the transmutation vs. illusion issue was cleared up, the item is still going to be prone to a lot of table variation. That probably can't be helped, though. Not without making the item entry a lot longer and/or changing the disguise rules.

Can't be helped? That isn't a bug; it's a feature.

I'm glad the game was written to be vague and unhelpful.

[Chengar Qordath]

blahpers wrote:

Chengar Qordath wrote:

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Ah, but it doesn't say it can provide a bonus.

Generally, Pathfinder is a permissive game.

It's much easier for DM to say a listed bonus doesn't apply, due to circumstance, than to say an unlisted bonus does apply, due to circumstance.

This is much more true in PFS, when being conservative is usually the best route.

A PFS Judge that is suspected of player favoritism, can lead to very uncomfortable situations.

I think that is a fair point to raise. While the transmutation vs. illusion issue was cleared up, the item is still going to be prone to a lot of table variation. That probably can't be helped, though. Not without making the item entry a lot longer and/or changing the disguise rules.

Can't be helped? That isn't a bug; it's a feature.

I like my rulebooks to be somewhat clearer and more consistent than "ask your DM, because every single one will run it differently."

[Nosdarb]

blahpers wrote:

Chengar Qordath wrote:

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Ah, but it doesn't say it can provide a bonus.

Generally, Pathfinder is a permissive game.

It's much easier for DM to say a listed bonus doesn't apply, due to circumstance, than to say an unlisted bonus does apply, due to circumstance.

This is much more true in PFS, when being conservative is usually the best route.

A PFS Judge that is suspected of player favoritism, can lead to very uncomfortable situations.

I think that is a fair point to raise. While the transmutation vs. illusion issue was cleared up, the item is still going to be prone to a lot of table variation. That probably can't be helped, though. Not without making the item entry a lot longer and/or changing the disguise rules.

Can't be helped? That isn't a bug; it's a feature.

Except, no. Variability is the enemy. This isn't a case of "sometimes you hit and sometimes you miss." Sometimes this will have a mechanical benefit, and sometimes it won't. It doesn't even have to change between DMs. One DM could rule one way and then the other in the same session.

As noted previously, my DM is pretty consistent. I don't anticipate having any issues with this working the way I want it to. It's all too easy to see how this could be different. If he was prone to swinging between options on a case by case basis, I would skip this item. If I were in PFS, where I might sit down at a table where I had never met the DM, I would skip this item. It might sometimes work out for me. It might also be a waste of 200 GP. I'm not a gambling man. I'll spend the 200GP on something I don't have to argue with someone over. I'll put it towards masterworking some equipment, or potions. Something, y'know, useful and reliable.

I hear the incoming "IT HAS ROLEPLAYING VALUE" now.

Of course it does. I can roleplay myself into a corner when I think the item works one way and the GM tells me that it doesn't after I've dug myself in deep. In and out of character, I'm an adventurer. I'm not going to spend resources on unreliable gear. If I have reason to suspect that it won't work (because GM fiat, or because it's simply finicky, depending on which perspective you're considering) then I'll sell it, break it down, or throw it away. My life could easily depend on a disguise. I'm not going to use the faulty one just because it's cheap. That's how you get dead.