|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
This is my question...
This sturdy leather coat is reinforced with [u]metal plates[/u] sewn into the lining.
Benefit: More cumbersome than light armor but less effective than most medium armors, the advantage of an armored coat is that a person can don it or remove it as a move action (there is no “don hastily” option for an armored coat). If worn over other armor, use the better AC bonus and worse value in all other categories; an armored coat has no effect if worn with heavy armor. The only magic effects that apply are those worn on top.
If I forcefully wrap a druid in an armoured coat as part of being tied up, does that mean that the druid cannot use druidic magic?
If I forcefully wrap an arcane spellcaster in an armoured coat as part of being toed up, does that mean that the spellcaster is subject to arcane spell failure (in addition to not being able to use somatic and verbal components)?
I never thought about it, but I don't see why it wouldn't, with the. arcane spellcaster, especially - the coat's going to hamper your movement regardless of whether you chose to wear the armor or not.
With the druid, you could maybe consider intention; if you don't choose to wear metal, do the nature spirits still consider it a breach of faith? Or is it more that the armor acts as a spiritual Faraday cage, that would hamper that connection regardless of intention?
Interesting strategy, although simply tying them up would likely accomplish the same thing.
If I forcefully wrap an arcane spellcaster in an armoured coat as part of being toed up, does that mean that the spellcaster is subject to arcane spell failure (in addition to not being able to use somatic and verbal components)?
Arcane spell failure only applies to spells with somatic components. If the spellcaster is already unable to cast spells with such components, adding an armored coat will have no further effect.
What about a druid though? the faith thing is interesting.
What about a druid though? the faith thing is interesting.
RAW is silent on the issue. At my tables, I use the intention rule, so the druid would still be able to cast spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Cold Iron is the weakness of Fey and some other nature-y magical creatures.
It seems feasible to me to say that iron (cold or not) is somehow disrupting the magic.
It's also a common thing in fantasy literature that people accidentally or against their will get saddled with items that weaken them, especially if taken prisoner and the enemy knows how to combat that type of foe.
So I would let it work at my table. Though I might require a Knowledge Religion check to see if the Characters would actually know about this weakness.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I knew this was going to be a 'thing', I might just play a druid that worships gorum.
They can still wildshape in armor. That is the only ability that still works...but when you have the ability to turn into a tiger without people knowing that...hehehehe....
|
|
What about a druid though? the faith thing is interesting.
Assuming they got out if it as soon as possible I don't think it'd be an issue. At least I wouldn't penalize them if I was a DM. If you had a monk or something with a vow not to drink alcohol, I wouldn't penalize them just because someone with a syringe arrow shot them with a shot of jaeger from across the street.
This is my question...
This sturdy leather coat is reinforced with [u]metal plates[/u] sewn into the lining.
Benefit: More cumbersome than light armor but less effective than most medium armors, the advantage of an armored coat is that a person can don it or remove it as a move action (there is no “don hastily” option for an armored coat). If worn over other armor, use the better AC bonus and worse value in all other categories; an armored coat has no effect if worn with heavy armor. The only magic effects that apply are those worn on top.
If I forcefully wrap a druid in an armoured coat as part of being tied up, does that mean that the druid cannot use druidic magic?
If I forcefully wrap an arcane spellcaster in an armoured coat as part of being toed up, does that mean that the spellcaster is subject to arcane spell failure (in addition to not being able to use somatic and verbal components)?
Personally I'd add a high circumstance penalty to the CMB to forcing a coat on someone. Holding someones arms behind their back and wrapping a rope around the wrists could be difficult. Forcing someones arms above their head while also forcing a 'shirt' down over their arms and head would not be an easy task - because a lot of what you do to pin someone is control their arms, while moving their arms above their head gives them a lot more freedom to use their arms then pinning them behind their back does.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the druid wears metal armor, he's supposed to lose his powers for 24 hours, regardless of intent.
Still, there's a way to regain your powers :
Atonement[...]Restore Cleric or Druid Spell Powers: A cleric or druid who has lost the ability to cast spells by incurring the anger of her deity may regain that ability by seeking atonement from another cleric of the same deity or another druid. If the transgression was intentional, the casting cleric must expend 2,500 gp in rare incense and offerings for her god's intercession.[...]If the armor thing was unintentional, you'd be allowed to atone for the lowest cost.
Although if you gave a druid an armored coat with Beguiling Gift, then if they failed the save they intentionally put it on. They would need to pay the the higher cost.
I don't think it would fall under Restoring Cleric or Druid Spell Powers at all, since the druid would lose more than just his spells.
It should be under Restore Class like a paladin, though just waiting 24 hours after escaping the metal armor looks pretty RAW.
Wrapping a druid up in a chainmail (or armored-coat) straight jacket sounds like an excellent way to tie one up as, it nixes his powers for a day. So once he escapes, he still mostly powerless.
I've always wondered what happens when you do this to an Eidolon.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm reading this thread and seeing the Druid as the little boy being chased by his mother with a coat as she tells him he'll catch his death of cold.
Then I'm imagining an entire asylum of Druids in armored coats, screaming that their jackets suppress their magic powers.
If I forcefully wrap a druid in an armoured coat as part of being tied up, does that mean that the druid cannot use druidic magic?
this is stupid, never do this.
An eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind, as the armor interferes with the summoner's connection to the eidolon.
So, what happens to the eidolon when you force it into the Armored Coat?
An eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind, as the armor interferes with the summoner's connection to the eidolon.So, what happens to the eidolon when you force it into the Armored Coat?
it goes insane and kills the summoner, duh.
|
|
I suppose
But I would not allow a single character to "put armor on him" as a choice instead of "tie up", no that is way that would be possible with only 2 arms.
If you had 3 or more characters grappling the druid to get the armor on him and already had the druid pinned then I'd probably handwave it.
it goes insane and kills the summoner, duh.An eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind, as the armor interferes with the summoner's connection to the eidolon.So, what happens to the eidolon when you force it into the Armored Coat?
At best, you count as having tied it up.
It clearly states it cannot wear armor of any kind. Sheesh. Nothing you do can change that. :D
it goes insane and kills the summoner, duh.An eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind, as the armor interferes with the summoner's connection to the eidolon.So, what happens to the eidolon when you force it into the Armored Coat?At best, you count as having tied it up.
It clearly states it cannot wear armor of any kind. Sheesh. Nothing you do can change that. :D
bolded for emphasis
bolded for emphasisit goes insane and kills the summoner, duh.An eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind, as the armor interferes with the summoner's connection to the eidolon.So, what happens to the eidolon when you force it into the Armored Coat?At best, you count as having tied it up.
It clearly states it cannot wear armor of any kind. Sheesh. Nothing you do can change that. :D
"An eidolon cannot wear any armor of any kind."
Reason for this is irrelevant, it simply cannot wear it.
bolded for emphasisit goes insane and kills the summoner, duh.An eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind, as the armor interferes with the summoner's connection to the eidolon.So, what happens to the eidolon when you force it into the Armored Coat?At best, you count as having tied it up.
It clearly states it cannot wear armor of any kind. Sheesh. Nothing you do can change that. :D
The obvious issue being that "interferes with the summoner's connection to the eidolon" is never codified.
bolded for emphasisit goes insane and kills the summoner, duh.An eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind, as the armor interferes with the summoner's connection to the eidolon.So, what happens to the eidolon when you force it into the Armored Coat?At best, you count as having tied it up.
It clearly states it cannot wear armor of any kind. Sheesh. Nothing you do can change that. :D
"An eidolon cannot wear any armor of any kind."
Reason for this is irrelevant, it simply cannot wear it.
So, what happens if the eidolon uses a scroll of instant armor?
i know, but if it's FORCED on, I like to imagine the eidolon goes insane. I never have evil people go "mwuahahahahaha, now that you're wearing armor you can't stop me", it's just weird and doesn't make any logical sense. he's going to tie you up and put a ball and chain on you, not put armor on you.
The obvious issue being that "interferes with the summoner's connection to the eidolon" is never codified.bolded for emphasisit goes insane and kills the summoner, duh.An eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind, as the armor interferes with the summoner's connection to the eidolon.So, what happens to the eidolon when you force it into the Armored Coat?At best, you count as having tied it up.
It clearly states it cannot wear armor of any kind. Sheesh. Nothing you do can change that. :D
Exactly.
Apply the 'interfered' condition. Heck, triple all listed penalties.
Then multiply by 0.
|
|
The obvious issue being that "interferes with the summoner's connection to the eidolon" is never codified.bolded for emphasisit goes insane and kills the summoner, duh.An eidolon cannot wear armor of any kind, as the armor interferes with the summoner's connection to the eidolon.So, what happens to the eidolon when you force it into the Armored Coat?At best, you count as having tied it up.
It clearly states it cannot wear armor of any kind. Sheesh. Nothing you do can change that. :D
I think that you need to read it as "to the eidolon, the summoner is counted as 'dead' or 'nonexistant' if their connection is broken".
If the summoner is unconscious, asleep, or killed, his eidolon is immediately banished.
In other words, I'd think that forcing an eidolon to wear armour makes it pop out of existence to it's original realm of existence, where it must stay for 24h. This does not apply to eidolons which stay around when the summoner is unconscious, asleep or killed, though, which raises the question what happens if they do stay around if they wear armour.
If we look at the feat "Resilient Eidolon"
If you are knocked unconscious, fall asleep, or are killed, your eidolon remains for a number of rounds equal to your summoner level before it is banished. If you are brought back to consciousness before this duration expires, your eidolon is not banished. If the duration expires before you are brought back to consciousness, your eidolon is banished normally.
You could read this as the eidolon being forcefully banished for 24h after wearing armour for as much rounds as your summoner level, though I would homerule that the summoner needs to succeed a concentration check in order to check or count how long it's been since the eidolon pulled on it's armored coat. If or when he or she loses track, the armored coat stays on until it's too late and the eidolon is banished. This time can be extended if the eidolon removes and puts back on the armored coat as a full-round action. Finally, as long as the summoner is casting spells, he or she needs a time-tracking device and use a swift action each turn to check the time.
So, what happens if the eidolon uses a scroll of instant armor?
It is wrapped in an armor it cannot wear, thus the spell has no practical effect (apart from perhaps acting as a target hog for Dispel Magic).
For this to work, the person being forced to don the armor needs to be helpless, paralyzed, or willing.
Ever try to get handcuffs on a person who didn't want them? There's a reason cops often look excessively violent when restraining people. Now imagine trying to get their whole arm into a sleeve.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Someone needs to make this into a "Spellcaster Bindings" for the next Wayfinder or RPG Superstar.
That way we can safely tie up "those kind of people".
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I forcefully wrap a druid in an armoured coat as part of being tied up, does that mean that the druid cannot use druidic magic?this is stupid, never do this.
What? And you wouldn't bind the arms and gag a sorcerer?
If the option is there to turn off druid magic, you should take it. This guy is both a magical threat and a melee threat...and hell, I am fairly sure just regular restraints would just be absorbed into the wildshape.
Playing "Man in the Iron Mask" with the guy that turns into dinosaurs sounds cool though.
|
The difference is, when you remove the bonds and gag the sorcerer can cast normally, while the druid still can't access the majority of their power for 24 hours.
I don't like seriously depowering characters for reasons outside the player's control. Forcing a druid into metal armour feels too much to me like dominating a paladin and making them perform evil acts. While the druid does get their powers back naturally, the 24 hour handicap could still cause serious problems in for example an escape scenario.
The eidolon's lack of specific consequences for wearing armour suggests that these prohibitions may not take unintentional violation into account.
I would suggest handling this by having a druid forced into metal armour be unable to use their magical abilities while wearing the armour, but regain them immediately if they take the armour off at the earliest opportunity. This gives clever people a way to shut druids down more securely and subtly than simply using physical bonds, but doesn't have extended consequences.
The Druid prohibition on metal isn't a matter of faith or spirits. It physically hampers their nature mojo. All their mystical Naturey stuff gets discharged for 24 hours. It isn't a matter of atonement because they haven't "angered" any deity or spirits or forces of nature or whatever; their battery was forcibly discharged and they need 24 hours to recharge it. Willing or otherwise doesn't matter.
Source?
And now I know how to truly imprison arcane casters. Say hello to the armored straitjacket. Thanks for the adventure idea, folks!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The difference is, when you remove the bonds and gag the sorcerer can cast normally, while the druid still can't access the majority of their power for 24 hours.
I don't like seriously depowering characters for reasons outside the player's control. Forcing a druid into metal armour feels too much to me like dominating a paladin and making them perform evil acts. While the druid does get their powers back naturally, the 24 hour handicap could still cause serious problems in for example an escape scenario.
The eidolon's lack of specific consequences for wearing armour suggests that these prohibitions may not take unintentional violation into account.
I would suggest handling this by having a druid forced into metal armour be unable to use their magical abilities while wearing the armour, but regain them immediately if they take the armour off at the earliest opportunity. This gives clever people a way to shut druids down more securely and subtly than simply using physical bonds, but doesn't have extended consequences.
Still, when you can turn into a dinosaur and literally crush the guy under your scaly butt for trying to put a coat on you...can you say it is 'beyond your control'?
Druids are inherently better when it comes to resisting grappling than sorcerers. Better BAB, size, etc. You can find ways out of this.
And again, the inherent danger of wildshape almost necessitates a way to turn it off if you are going to believably restraint a druid. Druids can absorb normal constraints into their wild shape. They can turn into mice and slip through any reasonable cage. You can't post guards since they can just eat them. They can also go straight through rock and stone if they turn into earth elementals.
And on top of all that, druids are still 9 level casters wtih a ton of tricks. Sure, the spell list is not quite as nice...but it is harder to shut a druid down with a nice tackle. And unlike wizards, they do not have the weakness of a spell book, and unlike sorcerers they are not limited in spell choice (they can pick any spell on their list).
Overall, I would put the armor weakness on par with the spell book weakness- a way to turn off the class when you hold them for long periods of time. And honestly- if you can even manage to get the armor on with a grapple check....more power to you man.
Now, I can agree that idea that instant armor would be broken if allowed. Obviously, that should instantly fail.
|
|
A wizard who has lost their spellbook can still cast spells, they just can't re-prepare them until they get their spellbook back - meaning that they are potentially at full power while looking for their spellbook. They also have the ability to heavily ward their books, borrow books, or make spares. The druid requires a divine focus for many (most?) of their spells, which is as vulnerable as a cleric's holy symbol or a wizard's component pouch. And while arcane casters aren't as well-defended against grapples they do have tricks to avoid them, like the Teleportation subschool's Shift power or the arcanist's Dimensional Slide.
Still, when you can turn into a dinosaur and literally crush the guy under your scaly butt for trying to put a coat on you...can you say it is 'beyond your control'?
...
Now, I can agree that idea that instant armor would be broken if allowed. Obviously, that should instantly fail.
Beguiling Gift can be used to compel a druid to don an armoured coat (or metal shield) and thus lose most of their class features for 24 hours. Yes, Will negates, but that's still a pretty potent save-or-suck for a 1st level spell.
And again, the inherent danger of wildshape almost necessitates a way to turn it off if you are going to believably restraint a druid. Druids can absorb normal constraints into their wild shape. They can turn into mice and slip through any reasonable cage. You can't post guards since they can just eat them. They can also go straight through rock and stone if they turn into earth elementals.
Hence the suggestion that the armoured coat shut off wild shape while worn, but not after being removed - that gives you a simple restraint that works on a druid, but it doesn't continue to cripple a druid who has been physically freed from the restraint.
And now I know how to truly imprison arcane casters. Say hello to the armored straitjacket. Thanks for the adventure idea, folks!
having a straight jacket that is weighted, i can buy, not making him wear full plate,
A wizard who has lost their spellbook can still cast spells, they just can't re-prepare them until they get their spellbook back - meaning that they are potentially at full power while looking for their spellbook. They also have the ability to heavily ward their books, borrow books, or make spares. The druid requires a divine focus for many (most?) of their spells, which is as vulnerable as a cleric's holy symbol or a wizard's component pouch. And while arcane casters aren't as well-defended against grapples they do have tricks to avoid them, like the Teleportation subschool's Shift power or the arcanist's Dimensional Slide.
I did say the 'long term' for the wizard. I know the comparison wasn't exact. My mind just thought of long term imprisonment (much like the Man in the Iron Mask...which just strikes me as a great motif here). I am just imagining a wizard that exhausted most of his spells, still got captured and robbed of his book, and then locked up. He would be just as vulnerable as a druid with the powers turned off for a day after the armor thing until they get a spellbook.
There are some side options that wizards can take to avoid this...just like how druids worship gorum to wildshape in armor. I am just going with the basics of the core class without all of these specializations.
The divine focus is not as vulnerable...if the druid knows you are coming. The focus gets absorbed when you wildshape. But yet, it can be grabbed in their natural form.
I am mostly just arguing that the forced armor is a valid mechanic when used in this method. Whether it is 100% perfect, or whether it needs tweaking is a bit of an arbitration that lies either with the devs or homegame GMs. You are invited to have it turn off immediately- I am just saying that the 24 hour thing is equally valid.
If it was instantly cured by removing the armor though...I would expect to see more people using some kind of welded on armor- with no proper method to remove without bolt cutters. It might seem cruel to the player...but again DRUIDS ARE NIGHTMARES TO KEEP CONTAINED. Hell, they are also some of the best assassins imaginable (since no one expects the little bluejay flitting at the window to suddenly grow a big beefy arm and stab you the instant you turn your back). I can reasonably see some people (particularly ones that are kinda askin' for 'nature's wrath') getting fairly paranoid. Combine that with medieval prison conditions...yeah, I can see it happening.