Glamered armor enhancement

[Sanmei Long]

My DM and I are uncertain what properties are possessed by Glamered armor and disagree on how they play, both mechanically and in-world. Wording of the Glamered enhancement follows:

Spoiler:

Aura moderate illusion; CL 10th; Weight —; Price +2,700 gp

DESCRIPTION

Upon command, a suit of glamered armor changes shape and appearance to assume the form of a normal set of clothing. The armor retains all its properties (including weight) when it is so disguised. Only a true seeing spell or similar magic reveals the true nature of the armor when it is disguised.

CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS

Craft Magic Arms and Armor, disguise self; Cost +1,350 gp

He says that the enhancement simply replicates the effects of Disguise Self and provide only a superficial visual illusion effect which can be penetrated by interacting with the illusion in any significant way. Because Disguise Self is a first level spell which can be cast with 11 in a casting stat, the DC to disbelieve the illusion would be 11.

My take is that the entry seems to imply that the effect is stronger and necessarily more limited than ordinary Disguise Self.

1) The wording appears to state that the enhancement effects only the armor, not the wearer, whereas Disguise Self can affect both target and all of target's equipment.

2) It is moderate aura illusion effect, compared to Hat of Disguise (which functions as the spell) being a weak aura. It is also caster level 10, compared to Hat of Disguise being caster level 1.

3) It doesn't reference a Will save to disbelieve. In fact, it seems to state that only powerful magic can penetrate the illusion.

4) The fact that it "changes shape and appearance" seems to imply a more substantive effect than simply concealing its ordinary appearance with an overlaying illusion.

5) Glamered equipment costs at least 50% more than a Hat of Disguise, although the difference in cost could be explained in a number of ways (doesn't take your head slot, higher CL means harder to suppress the illusion with Dispel).

6) The rules explicitly state that glamers can fool all five senses, and the wording does not state that any senses are excluded (the way Disguise Self does).

Therefore, it is my interpretation that the Glamered enhancement should actually allow the wearer to replicate basic effects of a polymorph effect, in essence actually transforming the armor into clothing which, despite its appearance, functions in every way like armor.

For example, if a cleric invoked the enhancement to change her breastplate into cleric vestments, the illusion would satisfy all five basic senses and fool any casual interaction into returning confirmation that it was, in fact, a set of ordinary clothing. However, the vestments would continue to be subtly restrictive and heavy for the wearer. Trying to sleep in them would be difficult. An arcane caster would find them hampering somatic motions just as much as a breastplate. Their extra weight would hinder efforts to be stealthy. Most importantly, plate mail glamered to resemble a silk dress should still turn a blade.

The primary difference is that the wearer of Glamered armor can more readily pass off the armor as actual clothing. For example, if guards grab the rogue wearing studded leather glamered to resemble clothing, he might try a Bluff check to drag his feet and cause them to misconstrue his weight and slightly stiff posture as recalcitrance, rather than as wearing concealed armor -- and rather than getting a trivial Will save that they have a 50% chance or better at beating.

Any input?

[roguerouge]

It's an illusion, not a transmutation spell. It does not work like a polymorph effect.

[_Ozy_]

It's an illusion, but it can't be penetrated like a disguise self. It's right in the description:

Quote:

Only a true seeing spell or similar magic reveals the true nature of the armor when it is disguised.

[Sanmei Long]

Yes; my question is how thorough an illusion is it, actually? Quoting the section on glamers,

"Glamer: A glamer spell changes a subject's sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear."

I'm wondering, and the text fails to specify, how much of this text applies to the similarly named enhancement.

[vhok]

the effect itself states very clearly how to see through it. nothing short of true seeing works. touching it does nothing.

[Nefreet]

This exact same argument was made for the Sleeves of Many Garments. People believed the sleeves were transformative, and not merely illusory. Popular "outfits" granted physical mechanical effects, such as a Swarmsuit, or Cold Weather Gear.

It was ruled eventually that the effect was merely an illusion. A glamer.

This enchantment is no different.

[Skylancer4]

Sanmei Long wrote:

Yes; my question is how thorough an illusion is it, actually? Quoting the section on glamers,

"Glamer: A glamer spell changes a subject's sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear."

I'm wondering, and the text fails to specify, how much of this text applies to the similarly named enhancement.

Naming means nothing. This game is full of things being "similar" yet not identical if not completely opposite. Also of things being shortened and apparently different from what they do (looking at you flavor and table text).

You will find the game less complicated and significantly easier to understand once you start accepting things do what they say, no more and no less. They needed a name for the property, they used glamered, it has nothing at all to do with the game mechanic 'glamer' unless it specifically references it.

The armor retains all properties it had including weight, yet looks and feels like something else entirely. Full stop. It isn't that thing and it isn't a glamer (as it can only been seen through by true sight or the like). It is what it says it is and it does what it says it does, look no further.

It is the heaviest bikini you have ever worn. And if it were a plate mail bikini it would take forever to take off.

[Nefreet]

The FAQ even mentions the Glamered property:

FAQ wrote:

Sleeves of Many Garments: Are the effects of sleeves of many garments illusion or transmutation?

---------------------------------------------
The effects are illusion (glamer) like the glamered weapon and armor properties. This means they can’t be disbelieved like a figment could, but they do not actually physically change the clothes. The transformation changes only the appearance, including the feel, smell, and other sensory aspects.

[vhok]

Nefreet wrote:

The FAQ even mentions the Glamered property:

FAQ wrote:

Sleeves of Many Garments: Are the effects of sleeves of many garments illusion or transmutation?

---------------------------------------------
The effects are illusion (glamer) like the glamered weapon and armor properties. This means they can’t be disbelieved like a figment could, but they do not actually physically change the clothes. The transformation changes only the appearance, including the feel, smell, and other sensory aspects.

including the feel, smell, and other sensory aspects

including the feel, smell, and other sensory aspects
including the feel, smell, and other sensory aspects
including the feel, smell, and other sensory aspects

without true seeing no matter what you feel smell touch or see it is what it is glamored to be.

[Sanmei Long]

Quote:

You will find the game less complicated and significantly easier to understand once you start accepting things do what they say, no more and no less.

Welllll, that would be a lot easier if things actually said what they do, rather than leaving the description so vague. For example, you've automatically assumed that a glamered armor feels like real cloth, which was one of the things I was asking about -- because the text doesn't say that this is the case. It also doesn't say that it's not the case.

So it's kind of hard to accept the rules as written if there are no rules written.

[Skylancer4]

Sanmei Long wrote:

Quote:

You will find the game less complicated and significantly easier to understand once you start accepting things do what they say, no more and no less.

Welllll, that would be a lot easier if things actually said what they do, rather than leaving the description so vague. For example, you've automatically assumed that a glamered armor feels like real cloth, which was one of the things I was asking about -- because the text doesn't say that this is the case. It also doesn't say that it's not the case.

So it's kind of hard to accept the rules as written if there are no rules written.

I never said it felt like cloth, feel free to re read. I said it was a heavy bikini. And because of the armor rules it would take substantial time to remove it (which in turn would probably end the effect). All because of the "keeps properties" clause.

Which is still leagues away from "it is a polymorph effect (because it seems to do that) because it doesn't say it isn't."

Like I said, it is the heaviest most difficult to get out of bikini you have ever worn. Because that is what it says it is.

[_Ozy_]

Er, it does feel like cloth if it's changed to look like cloth.

The transformation affects the 'feel', therefore it 'feels' like cloth. Not quite sure where the uncertainty is here.

[Skylancer4]

_Ozy_ wrote:

Er, it does feel like cloth if it's changed to look like cloth.

The transformation affects the 'feel', therefore it 'feels' like cloth. Not quite sure where the uncertainty is here.

I agree it does, my comment was more aimed at the OP looking at things with preconceptions and pointing it out as that can cause things to seem more complicated than they are. Sometimes things don't "make sense" in the game and people start looking for other things to justify how they think they should work, instead of accepting they don't make sense. Which was why I used the bikini example, the things can practically fall off when you dive into the water yet glamered plate mail bikini will take you 1d4+1 minutes to remove (half with help).

Does it make sense? No, but that is what happens.

[Nefreet]

vhok wrote:

Nefreet wrote:

The FAQ even mentions the Glamered property:

FAQ wrote:

Sleeves of Many Garments: Are the effects of sleeves of many garments illusion or transmutation?

---------------------------------------------
The effects are illusion (glamer) like the glamered weapon and armor properties. This means they can’t be disbelieved like a figment could, but they do not actually physically change the clothes. The transformation changes only the appearance, including the feel, smell, and other sensory aspects.

including the feel, smell, and other sensory aspects

including the feel, smell, and other sensory aspects
including the feel, smell, and other sensory aspects
including the feel, smell, and other sensory aspects

without true seeing no matter what you feel smell touch or see it is what it is glamored to be.

Which, as I said, is exactly the argument people made before this FAQ was issued.

You're adding nothing to the discussion by repeating it 4 times.

[vhok]

the faq officially says a glamer can be touched, smelled, looked at, tasted or whatever else and you cannot tell it is not what it seems to be. this armor enchantment says without true seeing you can't see through the glamer. therefore touching or anything else gives u zero chances to save to disbelieve. so your DM is wrong there is no save without true sight.

[Drahliana Moonrunner]

Sanmei Long wrote:

Yes; my question is how thorough an illusion is it, actually? Quoting the section on glamers,

"Glamer: A glamer spell changes a subject's sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear."

I'm wondering, and the text fails to specify, how much of this text applies to the similarly named enhancement.

For all mechanical purposes that matter, it's equivalent to Disguise Self, irregardless of flavor text. The armor does not change it's protective value, or it's encumbrance factor, and it does not lose any vulnerability it might have to rust monsters.

[dragonhunterq]

Sanmei Long wrote:

Therefore, it is my interpretation that the Glamered enhancement should actually allow the wearer to replicate basic effects of a polymorph effect, in essence actually transforming the armor into clothing which, despite its appearance, functions in every way like armor.

For example, if a cleric invoked the enhancement to change her breastplate into cleric vestments, the illusion would satisfy all five basic senses and fool any casual interaction into returning confirmation that it was, in fact, a set of ordinary clothing. However, the vestments would continue to be subtly restrictive and heavy for the wearer. Trying to sleep in them would be difficult. An arcane caster would find them hampering somatic motions just as much as a breastplate. Their extra weight would hinder efforts to be stealthy. Most importantly, plate mail glamered to resemble a silk dress should still turn a blade.

The primary difference is that the wearer of Glamered armor can more readily pass off the armor as actual clothing. For example, if guards grab the rogue wearing studded leather glamered to resemble clothing, he might try a Bluff check to drag his feet and cause them to misconstrue his weight and slightly stiff posture as recalcitrance, rather than as wearing concealed armor -- and rather than getting a trivial Will save that they have a 50% chance or better at beating.

Your examples are legitimate interpretations of how it works. Without true-seeing there is no way to determine that your silk dress is actually full plate. How an observer justifies to themselves your sluggishness or apparent clumsiness is no doubt up to them, but would probably take the form of a character flaw rather than an assumption that you are wearing armour.

Although at some point the evidence that your clothing isn't actually clothing is going to mount up to the point where a saving throw isn't necessary. That point is going to be largely a GM call.

illusions wrote:

Saving Throws and Illusions (Disbelief): Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive saving throws to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or interact with it in some fashion.

A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline.

A failed saving throw indicates that a character fails to notice something is amiss. A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw.

It is however important to highlight that it is not a polymorph effect. You can gain no other mechanical benefit other than appearing to not be wearing armour.

[wraithstrike]

There is no saving throw. Not all illusions grant saves. Illusion and mirror image are examples of this.

That "Saving Throws and Illusions (Disbelief):" text is for the ones that have "Disbelief" in the save line of the spell.

As an example look at the Ghost Sound spell.

Ghost Sound wrote:

Saving Throw Will disbelief; Spell Resistance no

[Diego Rossi]

I want to point out a different part of the FAQ Nefreet cited:

FAQ wrote:

Sleeves of Many Garments: Are the effects of sleeves of many garments illusion or transmutation?

The effects are illusion (glamer) like the glamered weapon and armor properties. This means they can’t be disbelieved like a figment could, but they do not actually physically change the clothes. The transformation changes only the appearance, including the feel, smell, and other sensory aspects.

The FAQ explicitly say that they can't be disbelieved, so the OP question is resolved. There is risk of having the glamour discovered when a guard grab someone wearing a glamored armor as there is no way to disbelieve the effect.

With an appropriate perception check against the bluff of the person wearing the armor (or some other appropriate skill use) the guard can notice that there is something strange, like the person weighting too much, but that will not allow him to pierce the illusion, it will only make him suspicious.

[swoosh]

Nefreet wrote:

This exact same argument was made for the Sleeves of Many Garments. People believed the sleeves were transformative, and not merely illusory. Popular "outfits" granted physical mechanical effects, such as a Swarmsuit, or Cold Weather Gear.

It was ruled eventually that the effect was merely an illusion. A glamer.

This enchantment is no different.

Did you even read the OP? The crux of his question was whether or not glamered armor could be disbelieved. The sleeves errata doesn't really have anything to do with that, except in the way Diego references. You're trying to win an argument that isn't being made.

[Dracoknight]

Hmmm, so you mean that i can have my fantasy of a busty paladin in a bikini plate make sense by the rules?

Time to make a follower of Calistria!

On a serious note, it does say that only true sight and similar spells can see through it, so if anything it seems like the intent of the enchantment is to allow armor to look the way they want without any "issues".

[Wei Ji the Learner]

Dracoknight wrote:

Hmmm, so you mean that i can have my fantasy of a busty paladin in a bikini plate make sense by the rules?

Time to make a follower of Calistria!

On a serious note, it does say that only true sight and similar spells can see through it, so if anything it seems like the intent of the enchantment is to allow armor to look the way they want without any "issues".

My bard uses this very effectively to either go 'undercover' or to 'draw out' opponents while still retaining his chain shirt.

[Ascalaphus]

I suppose it's a workaround for various barbarian PCs too. 99.99% of all nice character art features barbarians in minimalist armor. The majority of barbarian PCs still try using real armor.

[Nefreet]

swoosh wrote:

Nefreet wrote:

This exact same argument was made for the Sleeves of Many Garments. People believed the sleeves were transformative, and not merely illusory.

Did you even read the OP?

Is your dismissive comment really necessary?

Sanmei Long wrote:

Therefore, it is my interpretation that the Glamered enhancement should actually allow the wearer to replicate basic effects of a polymorph effect, in essence actually transforming the armor into clothing which, despite its appearance, functions in every way like armor.

[Diego Rossi]

Ascalaphus wrote:

I suppose it's a workaround for various barbarian PCs too. 99.99% of all nice character art features barbarians in minimalist armor. The majority of barbarian PCs still try using real armor.

Fortunately I was wearing my armor

:-)

[TriOmegaZero]

My holy vindicator rocks glamered full plate. I like to describe him in cleric's vestments until the first time the enemy fails to hit him. There is a CLANG and the glamer ripples away to show his armor. I suppose I don't have to do that, but it's just a fun character quirk.

[Rysky]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

My holy vindicator rocks glamered full plate. I like to describe him in cleric's vestments until the first time the enemy fails to hit him. There is a CLANG and the glamer ripples away to show his armor. I suppose I don't have to do that, but it's just a fun character quirk.

What's their Deity?

[Gisher]

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

Dracoknight wrote:

Hmmm, so you mean that i can have my fantasy of a busty paladin in a bikini plate make sense by the rules?

Time to make a follower of Calistria!

On a serious note, it does say that only true sight and similar spells can see through it, so if anything it seems like the intent of the enchantment is to allow armor to look the way they want without any "issues".

My bard uses this very effectively to either go 'undercover' or to 'draw out' opponents while still retaining his chain shirt.

My Staff Magus/Hexcrafter does the same. Intelligent enemies seeing someone with a familiar, holding a staff, and wearing "robes" tend to adopt tactics that are useful against a Wizard, Sorcerer, or Witch. Those often work poorly against a Magus.

[TriOmegaZero]

Rysky wrote:

What's their Deity?

Abadar. He did some time as a guard in Absalom. My favorite use of it came when the party was having a lovely meeting over tea and heard invaders attacking. He stood up, made a comment about it being time, lifted his holy symbol from off his chest and let it fall. CLANG and the glamer rippled away.

[Rysky]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Rysky wrote:

What's their Deity?

Abadar. He did some time as a guard in Absalom. My favorite use of it came when the party was having a lovely meeting over tea and heard invaders attacking. He stood up, made a comment about it being time, lifted his holy symbol from off his chest and let it fall. CLANG and the glamer rippled away.

My dislike of Abadar aside...

"Uh, don't you need armor?"
"My faith protects me."
"Faith in your God, or faith in the expensive stuff you spent your coin on?"
"My God is Abadar. So yes."

[Qaianna]

Rysky wrote:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Rysky wrote:

What's their Deity?

Abadar. He did some time as a guard in Absalom. My favorite use of it came when the party was having a lovely meeting over tea and heard invaders attacking. He stood up, made a comment about it being time, lifted his holy symbol from off his chest and let it fall. CLANG and the glamer rippled away.

My dislike of Abadar aside...

"Uh, don't you need armor?"
"My faith protects me."
"Faith in your God, or faith in the expensive stuff you spent your coin on?"
"My God is Abadar. So yes."

I'm going to steal that once my Gorumite barbarian gets her agile breastplate upgraded to glammered. Modified, of course. Assuming she doesn't glammer it into full plate with more spikes than a legion of hellknights ...

[Rysky]

Qaianna wrote:

Rysky wrote:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Rysky wrote:

What's their Deity?

Abadar. He did some time as a guard in Absalom. My favorite use of it came when the party was having a lovely meeting over tea and heard invaders attacking. He stood up, made a comment about it being time, lifted his holy symbol from off his chest and let it fall. CLANG and the glamer rippled away.

My dislike of Abadar aside...

"Uh, don't you need armor?"
"My faith protects me."
"Faith in your God, or faith in the expensive stuff you spent your coin on?"
"My God is Abadar. So yes."

I'm going to steal that once my Gorumite barbarian gets her agile breastplate upgraded to glammered. Modified, of course. Assuming she doesn't glammer it into full plate with more spikes than a legion of hellknights ...

Order of the Hedgehog!

[Sanmei Long]

With regards to my reference to "basic effects of a polymorph effect," I admit I was unclear. What I meant is that the item appears to be genuinely transformed by casual investigation, and it takes special insight to realize that the nature of the item is not what it appears to be. Even then without magical assistance, you might conclude that the extra weight is a different magical property, a curse, or that the clothing is made out of special material.

Has anyone else read A Wizard of Earthsea? This part comes to mind:

Quote:

Pointing his finger Jasper spoke a few strange words, and where he pointed on the hillside among the green grasses a little thread of water trickled, and grew, and now a spring gushed out and the water went running down the hill. Ged put his hand in the stream and it felt wet, drank of it and it was cool. Yet for all that it would quench no thirst, being but illusion.

This sounds like how I would imagine this to be -- illusion so convincing that it can be interacted with as if it were real, but which cannot change the fundamental nature of what is concealed. It seems as if the item is transformed and can be interacted with as if it were actually a new form, but only on a surface level.

In other words, if you turn your armor into a swarm suit, the swarm simply seems to flow into loose fabric weaves without resistance. I'm looking at this for disguise value, not to duplicate mechanical properties of other equipment.

(I'm kind of amused at the thought of a glamer bikini taking several minutes to successfully put on. I picture this being because the straps are strangely resistant to knotting and unless you take the time to carefully adjust and tie it, it either slips off or hangs awkwardly. Armor properties: Hastily donned, -1 AC, +1 ACP, -8 penalty to saves against wardrobe malfunction.)

[Matthew Morris]

Rysky wrote:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Rysky wrote:

What's their Deity?

Abadar. He did some time as a guard in Absalom. My favorite use of it came when the party was having a lovely meeting over tea and heard invaders attacking. He stood up, made a comment about it being time, lifted his holy symbol from off his chest and let it fall. CLANG and the glamer rippled away.

My dislike of Abadar aside...

"Uh, don't you need armor?"
"My faith protects me."
"Faith in your God, or faith in the expensive stuff you spent your coin on?"
"My God is Abadar. So yes."

To paraphrase a certain paladin: "My Faith protects me. My glamoured armor helps."

[Matthew Morris]

Dracoknight wrote:

Hmmm, so you mean that i can have my fantasy of a busty paladin in a bikini plate make sense by the rules?

Time to make a follower of Calistria!

My flame dancer bard of Calistria has this on her 'to do' list, along with a bladed belt for a scorpion whip. Gods help the poor NPCs when she gets glibness up and running.

"Me? A pathfinder? Look at how I'm dressed, I'm the entertainment."

[Rysky]

Matthew Morris wrote:

Dracoknight wrote:

Hmmm, so you mean that i can have my fantasy of a busty paladin in a bikini plate make sense by the rules?

Time to make a follower of Calistria!

My flame dancer bard of Calistria has this on her 'to do' list, along with a bladed belt for a scorpion whip. Gods help the poor NPCs when she gets glibness up and running.

"Me? A pathfinder? Look at how I'm dressed, I'm the entertainment."

You wouldn't need glibness, let alone the Bluff skill for that.

[Matthew Morris]

Rysky wrote:

Matthew Morris wrote:

Dracoknight wrote:

Hmmm, so you mean that i can have my fantasy of a busty paladin in a bikini plate make sense by the rules?

Time to make a follower of Calistria!

My flame dancer bard of Calistria has this on her 'to do' list, along with a bladed belt for a scorpion whip. Gods help the poor NPCs when she gets glibness up and running.

"Me? A pathfinder? Look at how I'm dressed, I'm the entertainment."

You wouldn't need glibness, let alone the Bluff skill for that.

Ok, gods help the poor GM then...

Bardic midadventures sidetrack

Spoiler:

playing a scenario where my archaeologist had his heroism/glibness combo running. NPC says our druid can't bring her dire lion companion into the market.

Me: Um, no you can't keep her out.
NPC guard: What?
Me: Under the Kosovarans with Disabilitys Act you can't refuse entry of a service animal that is working.
NPC Guard (GM giving me the what the hell look) What is her 'service animal for'?
Me: Technically you can't ask that either, but it's for panic attacks.
GM: Roll me a bluff check.
Me: Burning luck... Ok that's a 58.
GM: *makes sputtering noises, targets my character for rest of scenario*