|
I'm making a kensai magus, and I'm wondering what light armors out there I could still wear while negating the penalties. For instance, mithril would reduce the armor check penalty to nothing for most light armors, so penalty on skill checks or attack rolls (for not being proficient). Mithril also reduces the arcane spell failure chance by 10%. But this is only for metal and as far as I can tell the only light metal armor is a Chain Shirt which would still leave me with a 10% spell failure.
Likewise Darkleaf also reduces spell failure chance by 10% but to a minimum of 5%.
Are there any good options for armor hidden out there that I'm missing?
I have an old wizard character that wore a haramaki. I think it's only a +1 and wouldn't do your magus much good. It doesn't have any penalties, though. I mean, I guess it would be decent at lower levels, if you went with high Dex, throw in a Shield spell. Then you would have some pretty sturdy paper armor. :P
In the eastern armor is what you're wanting I think.
|
|
I have an old wizard character that wore a haramaki. I think it's only a +1 and wouldn't do your magus much good. It doesn't have any penalties, though. I mean, I guess it would be decent at lower levels, if you went with high Dex, throw in a Shield spell. Then you would have some pretty sturdy paper armor. :P
"Much good" is very subjective. As a *kensai magus, I'm "not supposed" to wear armor. But 1 AC for 3g is a steal (especially with no downsides).
*edit: as a "kensai" magus, that is
I have an old wizard character that wore a haramaki. I think it's only a +1 and wouldn't do your magus much good. It doesn't have any penalties, though. I mean, I guess it would be decent at lower levels, if you went with high Dex, throw in a Shield spell. Then you would have some pretty sturdy paper armor. :P"Much good" is very subjective. As a magus, I'm "not supposed" to wear armor. But 1 AC for 3g is a steal (especially with no downsides).
Oh yeah. That's how I felt too. I recommend getting it, then enchanting out the wazoo.
Then your flimsy cardboard armor will be cardboard forged by the gods.|
|
I have an old wizard character that wore a haramaki. I think it's only a +1 and wouldn't do your magus much good. It doesn't have any penalties, though. I mean, I guess it would be decent at lower levels, if you went with high Dex, throw in a Shield spell. Then you would have some pretty sturdy paper armor. :P"Much good" is very subjective. As a *kensai magus, I'm "not supposed" to wear armor. But 1 AC for 3g is a steal (especially with no downsides).
*edit: as a "kensai" magus, that is
In the eastern armor is what you're wanting I think.
Yeah, 1 AC is better than no extra AC. I was hoping for more something still light but made of metal for 2 or 3 AC with a low spell failure chance so I could make one out of mithril. But yeah, 1 is better than none.
|
Yeah, 1 AC is better than no extra AC. I was hoping for more something still light but made of metal for 2 or 3 AC with a low spell failure chance so I could make one out of mithril. But yeah, 1 is better than none.
Yeah - they intentially make all metal armor at least 15% base to prevent just that.
Though you can wear a light mithril shield with no arcane spell failure chance or armor check penalty. I use one for my sorceror.
And as a light shield - you have your hand free so that you can hold your weapon while casting, then shift the weapon back to your main hand. Both as free actions.
|
|
Though you can wear a light mithril shield with no arcane spell failure chance or armor check penalty. I use one for my sorceror.
And as a light shield - you have your hand free so that you can hold your weapon while casting, then shift the weapon back to your main hand. Both as free actions.
He probably doesn't want a shield, seeing as how he can't spell combat while using it.
|
|
He probably doesn't want a shield, seeing as how he can't spell combat while using it.Though you can wear a light mithril shield with no arcane spell failure chance or armor check penalty. I use one for my sorceror.
And as a light shield - you have your hand free so that you can hold your weapon while casting, then shift the weapon back to your main hand. Both as free actions.
Right - my bad. (never played a magus myself) Though it might be worth taking the quickdraw feat along with using a mithril quickdraw shield. Said combo lets you put away/draw the shield as a free action, letting you do so both before and after using spell combat.
Not amazing - but considering that there are a few feats that just give you +1 AC, it's pretty good. Initially it gives you +1AC, but it allows you to enchant the shield further, and giving +1 to both shield & armor is considerably cheaper than +2 armor, even after the base cost of the mithril quickdraw shield. So in the long term, it'd add several points of AC.
|
|
He probably doesn't want a shield, seeing as how he can't spell combat while using it.Though you can wear a light mithril shield with no arcane spell failure chance or armor check penalty. I use one for my sorceror.
And as a light shield - you have your hand free so that you can hold your weapon while casting, then shift the weapon back to your main hand. Both as free actions.
Right - my bad. (never played a magus myself) Though it might be worth taking the quickdraw feat along with using a mithril quickdraw shield. Said combo lets you put away/draw the shield as a free action, letting you do so both before and after using spell combat.
Not amazing - but considering that there are a few feats that just give you +1 AC, it's pretty good. Initially it gives you +1AC, but it allows you to enchant the shield further, and giving +1 to both shield & armor is considerably cheaper than +2 armor, even after the base cost of the mithril quickdraw shield. So in the long term, it'd add several points of AC.
That's definitely worth considering. I haven't planned my feats yet but I'll see if there's room for quickdraw.
|
|
That's definitely worth considering. I haven't planned my feats yet but I'll see if there's room for quickdraw.
You probably shouldn't bother at level 1 as you won't be able to afford the mithril quickdraw shield. But it might well be worth it at level 3.
(Of note - take it with a grain of salt - I tend to build characters more defensivly than most seem to. Of course - some people barely build for defense at all, and then seem somehow outraged when the GM has people hit them back. :P)
As I recall, enchanted haramaki is a little cheaper than bracers of armor. It also qualifies for some "armor only" enchantments the bracers don't.
I'd expect that some DMs might not allow you to put away a quick draw shield, use spell combat, and then pull out the quick draw shield again. If you wanted to be a real oddball you could take Improved Shield Bash and use a mithral shield as your weapon though.
|
|
As I recall, enchanted haramaki is a little cheaper than bracers of armor. It also qualifies for some "armor only" enchantments the bracers don't.
I'd expect that some DMs might not allow you to put away a quick draw shield, use spell combat, and then pull out the quick draw shield again. If you wanted to be a real oddball you could take Improved Shield Bash and use a mithral shield as your weapon though.
The enchantments on bracers of armor cost the same as for those on armor. The disadvantage is that it starts with a base AC of 0 vs the haramaki's AC of 1, and it uses up the bracers slot.
|
The enchantments on bracers of armor cost the same as for those on armor. The disadvantage is that it starts with a base AC of 0 vs the haramaki's AC of 1, and it uses up the bracers slot.As I recall, enchanted haramaki is a little cheaper than bracers of armor. It also qualifies for some "armor only" enchantments the bracers don't.
I'd expect that some DMs might not allow you to put away a quick draw shield, use spell combat, and then pull out the quick draw shield again. If you wanted to be a real oddball you could take Improved Shield Bash and use a mithral shield as your weapon though.
And some enchantments, such as brawling, are specifically light armor only.
I recall there's some kind of restriction like you can't get enchantments which have a flat cost on bracers.
|
|
As I recall, enchanted haramaki is a little cheaper than bracers of armor. It also qualifies for some "armor only" enchantments the bracers don't.
I'd expect that some DMs might not allow you to put away a quick draw shield, use spell combat, and then pull out the quick draw shield again. If you wanted to be a real oddball you could take Improved Shield Bash and use a mithral shield as your weapon though.
This is for PFS so I don't see how they can stop me from taking legal free actions (assuming quickdraw shields are legal, I have no idea if that are or not).
|
|
I'm sure someone will have the relevant quote, but DM's get the final say on what/how many free actions are reasonable in a round.
So in PFS, a DM would be well within their rights to tell you you can't both wear and not wear the shield as it suits you.
Certainly, if you were sitting at my table, I'd tell you to choose on or off for the round.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Quickdraw shields are legal, and it is a valid strategy. But a lot of gms dont like the rules for it, and you may experience table variation in how many free actions they allow you to use it. Generally other than talking most GMs I know limit you to two free actions on your turn other than talking.
Personally, I would allow you to use it, but after seeing you perform the trick, an intelligent foe may decide to ready an action to attack when you stow the shield, provided it doesn't conflict with the listed tactics for the encounter.
|
|
I'm sure someone will have the relevant quote, but DM's get the final say on what/how many free actions are reasonable in a round.
So in PFS, a DM would be well within their rights to tell you you can't both wear and not wear the shield as it suits you.
Certainly, if you were sitting at my table, I'd tell you to choose on or off for the round.
So even though I'd be wasting a feat slot and the rules clearly say "free actions" (plural), you'd limit me to a single free action per turn?
I don't have the quote on hand as I'm on a tablet, but the rules say plural and the quote wasn't meant for barring people from only two free actions per round.
|
|
I don't have the quote on hand as I'm on a tablet, but the rules say plural and the quote wasn't meant for barring people from only two free actions per round.
I could see limiting you from other free actions for the turn. (I have heard the limit of two before.)
Limiting more than that seems odd. That's making a free action identical to a swift.
|
|
What I am saying is I would limit the number of *a particular* free action you could take each round.
The important thing to note here is not what I, personally would do, but that the paizo team has made it very clearly dm fiat how many and what of free actions you can take in a round. I was intending to point out that you will see table variation, and you will have to suck it up when that happens, as there is no hard and fast rule to guarantee the combo.
Also, from a RAI (gasp) standpoint, it seems unlikely that the quickdraw shield was designed to allow you to wear it only in your opponents turn, but such is the nature of a turn based system.
I'm sure someone will have the relevant quote, but DM's get the final say on what/how many free actions are reasonable in a round.
So in PFS, a DM would be well within their rights to tell you you can't both wear and not wear the shield as it suits you.
Certainly, if you were sitting at my table, I'd tell you to choose on or off for the round.
Would you keep an archer from making a full attack every round? After all it is a free action to load the bow for each shot. Does the archer's full attack prevent him from speaking and or dropping prone, when there is no issue when the melee guy does the same? How about limiting weapons that can be drawn with Quickdraw? Dropping weapons? The rules are quite explicit about taking a hand off a weapon, doing something, and then putting that hand back on the weapon being allowable, so why the difference with a shield that is obviously intended to do the exact same thing?
|
|
What I am saying is I would limit the number of *a particular* free action you could take each round.
The important thing to note here is not what I, personally would do, but that the paizo team has made it very clearly dm fiat how many and what of free actions you can take in a round. I was intending to point out that you will see table variation, and you will have to suck it up when that happens, as there is no hard and fast rule to guarantee the combo.
Also, from a RAI (gasp) standpoint, it seems unlikely that the quickdraw shield was designed to allow you to wear it only in your opponents turn, but such is the nature of a turn based system.
*shrug* - Worst cast scenario and you'd get the bonus every other round that you're using spell combat and every round that you don't.
I'm making a kensai magus, and I'm wondering what light armors out there I could still wear while negating the penalties. For instance, mithril would reduce the armor check penalty to nothing for most light armors, so penalty on skill checks or attack rolls (for not being proficient). Mithril also reduces the arcane spell failure chance by 10%. But this is only for metal and as far as I can tell the only light metal armor is a Chain Shirt which would still leave me with a 10% spell failure.
Likewise Darkleaf also reduces spell failure chance by 10% but to a minimum of 5%.
Are there any good options for armor hidden out there that I'm missing?
Unless you are planning on putting enchantments other than "+"s on it you are better off getting a Pearl of Power and Lesser Extend rod and having your friendly Wizard cast Mage Armor on you. Spontaneous casters can usually spare the slot, and will be even more willing to do so if you let them use the rod on one of their buffs too.
|
|
It's obviously intended to be drawn as a free action with quick draw. It's not obviously intended to be stown as a free action.
Every shield can be drawn as a free action with the quick draw feat. The quickdraw shield can also be put away as a free action with the quick draw feat.
Benefit: If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you may don or put away a quickdraw shield as a swift action combined with a regular move. If you have the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, you can draw a light or one-handed weapon with one hand and a quickdraw shield with the other in the time it would normally take you to draw one weapon. If you have the Quick Draw feat, you may don or put away a quickdraw shield as a free action.
It seems pretty obvious to me. :P
|
|
It's obviously intended to be drawn as a free action with quick draw. It's not obviously intended to be stown as a free action.Every shield can be drawn as a free action with the quick draw feat. The quickdraw shield can also be put away as a free action with the quick draw feat.How do you figure that? A weapon can be drawn as a free action using quick draw, but how does that let you wear a shield as a piece of armor as a free action?
Okay - arguably you can't draw a buckler as a free action with quick draw. But both heavy & light shields are also weapons, meaning that you can draw them as free actions with the quick draw feat.
I'd like to point out that the rules for drawing both weapons & shields are the same.
Whatever the case - the quickdraw shield spells out quite clearly that you can both draw it and put it away as free actions when combined with the quick draw feat, which was the point of my previous post.
|
|
I would argue that since spell combat is a full-round action that requires a free hand, you could quick draw the shield after spell combatting, but not gain the shield bonus until the start of your next turn. But I readily admit my reading of the ability could be incorrect.
Yeah - full round actions don't work that way.
I will agree that there is an argument that you couldn't both put away & draw the shield in the same turn. (RAW it works - but GMs have enough leeway to not let you do so.) But if you draw it after spell combat - it'd give you the AC bonus that turn.
Anything else wouldn't be RAW or RAI. It'd be a houserule.
|
|
Citation?I would argue that since spell combat is a full-round action that requires a free hand, you could quick draw the shield after spell combatting, but not gain the shield bonus until the start of your next turn. But I readily admit my reading of the ability could be incorrect.Yeah - full round actions don't work that way.
I will agree that there is an argument that you couldn't both put away & draw the shield in the same turn. (RAW it works - but GMs have enough leeway to not let you do so.) But if you draw it after spell combat - it'd give you the AC bonus that turn.
Anything else wouldn't be RAW or RAI. It'd be a houserule.
Because you can still do free/swift actions along with full round actions. And nothing says that full round actions in any way affect said swift/free actions.
Therefore your ruling would be to artifically delay the effect of a free action with absolutely no basis in the rules.
I can't come up with a specific citation - but that's because I can't prove a negative. The burdern to come up with a citation would be on your ruling.
As I said before - you can feel free to houserule it that way in your home games, but that's what you'd be doing.
|
|
Except that it's a full-round action, which means it takes the whole round no matter how many free actions you take in that round. And it requires a free hand for the entirety of the full-round action. If you draw a shield at the end of the round, you didn't have a free hand for the full round.
And actually, you're ruling that it is legal. I'm ruling that it is not. You need to show permission in the rules.
Other than full round spells nothing states that a full round action is anything beyond an action that uses up both your standard & move actions. You'd need to find evidence of it doing so.
But - I'm done arguing it with you.
If you rule that way (it's a houserule) then he could just use a mithril buckler without the quick draw feat. It's nearly as good as the quickdraw/quick draw combo with a picky(grumpy) GM as it lets you get the bonus any round you aren't using spell combat (vs every other round with spell combat) and you don't have to burn a feat to use it.
|
|
A full-round action requires an entire round to complete.So, if the full-round action of Spell Combat takes an entire round to complete, you have to have a free hand for the entire round.
I'm not sure how that can be any clearer.
You didn't use the whole quote.
A full-round action requires an entire round to complete. Thus, it can’t be coupled with a standard or a move action, though if it does not involve moving any distance, you can take a 5-foot step.
The text states the limitation of a full-round action. If there were any further limitations upon full round actions - it would state them. There aren't.
It does take an entire round. YOUR entire round. With the noted exception of free actions, five foot steps, and swift actions (in it's description).
I realise that the turn based system is abstract. But it's still a turn based system. Each player has their own round of combat, entirely seperate from anyone else. If everyone went at the same time - closing to melee on someone would be a lot of guesswork as you'd have to guess how your opponent would move.
Just use a Ring of Force Shield.
Deactivate it at the start of your turn. Use spell combat. Reactivate it.
A shield that flickers out of existence as you weave swordplay and magic together is very in line with Magus flavor.
|
|
Just use a Ring of Force Shield.
Deactivate it at the start of your turn. Use spell combat. Reactivate it.
A shield that flickers out of existence as you weave swordplay and magic together is very in line with Magus flavor.
True - it gains coolness factor. But you can't magic it up further and it uses up a ring slot.
The price of that ring is somewhere in cost between a +2 & +3 mithril shield (of whatever sort) giving either +3 or +4 to AC.
If you want to make sure that you don't have to deal with table variation, you'd be better off with a mithril buckler and just deal with having a lower AC when you use spell combat.
Memorize a Shield spell.
works nicely with spell storing things or a lesser quicken rod with a glove of storing (as does true strike, coincidentally)
|
|
The way I understood bucklers is that if you use that hand to attack during your turn, you didn't get the benefit of it's AC until the start of your next turn. Spell Combat certainly uses your buckler hand, so I can't see where it puts you in any different position than the quickdraw shield and the Quick Draw feat.
I know - that's why I mentioned it in my post where I first suggested the buckler alternative.
If you want to make sure that you don't have to deal with table variation, you'd be better off with a mithril buckler and just deal with having a lower AC when you use spell combat.
But - you won't be using spell combat every round. Not even most rounds. I've never played a magus myself, but from what I've seen they've used spellstrike more often than spell combat.
|
|
Spell Combat is used to cast the spell.
Spellstrike is used to deliver touch spells, often as a free attack in the round they are cast.
Baring very specific spells (Chill Touch or Frostbite), a magus will not use Spellstrike more frequently than Spell Combat.
My magus, for example, will use Spell Combat every single round if able. Not all of those spells will be delivered via Spellstrike.