|
When an ability in a book you own allows you to apply a template to a creature (familiar, AC, summon, etc), do you also need to own the book in which the template is published (even if it's on the Paizo PRD)? I'm assuming that the answer is "Yes" but wanted to double check. Specific ability in question is Army of Darkness (shadow template to summons) from the Shadow Mystery published in Blood of Shadows.
Thank you.
P.S. Is there a PFS consensus on Magic Vestments working or not working on the various Oracle armor revelations, or is it table variation?
|
|
Armor of Bones (Su): You can conjure armor made of bones that grants you a +4 armor bonus. At 7th level, and every four levels thereafter, this bonus increases by +2. At 13th level, this armor grants you DR 5/bludgeoning. You can use this armor for 1 hour per day per oracle level. This duration does not need to be consecutive, but it must be spent in 1-hour increments.
Cloak of Darkness (Su): You conjure a cloak of shadowy darkness that grants you a +4 armor bonus and a +2 circumstance bonus on Stealth checks. At 7th level, and every four levels thereafter, these bonuses increase by +2. You can use this cloak for 1 hour per day per oracle level. The duration does not need to be consecutive, but it must be spent in 1-hour increments.
|
|
Cool combo for the Armor of Bones. I hadn't considered that before.
The other one is weird. If it conjures a "cloak", does that mean you can't also wear a Cloak of Resistance?
I guess that's a topic for the Rules Questions Forum.
nothing says you can't wear 2 cloaks , especially when one of them is probably being metaphorical and is made of non dimensional shadow. if it took a magical item slot it would say so.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
they aren't armor. They are a ability, not physical armor. And I'm not going to have one be a special loophole because of the wording used to describe the effect over the other that used different wording. They are as boostable as mage armor, which I don't allow as a target for magic vestment.
|
I suppose if anything, you could magic vestment your clothing, since that provides an enhancement bonus, and then conjure your armor of bones, which grants you an armor bonus. Much like mage armor and magic vestment. Different types, so they stack.
But I would need a more definitive reason why conjured armor isn't armor, I think.
Of course, anyone is free to rule how they wish. I just don't see the position as very strong.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 8
|
I suppose if anything, you could magic vestment your clothing, since that provides an enhancement bonus, and then conjure your armor of bones, which grants you an armor bonus. Much like mage armor and magic vestment. Different types, so they stack.
But I would need a more definitive reason why conjured armor isn't armor, I think.
Of course, anyone is free to rule how they wish. I just don't see the position as very strong.
Uh, magic vestment is an enhancement bonus to AC which applies to the +0 armor bonus your clothing normally has, and mage armor is a separate armor bonus. Just like having mage armor and a separate suit of armor, the two don't stack like you suggest.
|
|
Magic vestment enhances the armor of the target. So your cloths now give an armor bonus = to 0 + enhancement.
and mage armor and bracers of armor make a force field around you, and the wind blessing, lets you create an invisible shell of air. These and the the other oracle abilities to "make armor" are not armor in the armor table and thus I say aren't valid targets for magic vestment, and I will rule thusly until forced to change. If I couldn't make a +1 version of it, it's not valid for the spell.
|
Magic vestment enhances the armor of the target. So your cloths now give an armor bonus = to 0 + enhancement.
and mage armor and bracers of armor make a force field around you, and the wind blessing, lets you create an invisible shell of air. These and the the other oracle abilities to "make armor" are not armor in the armor table and thus I say aren't valid targets for magic vestment, and I will rule thusly until forced to change. If I couldn't make a +1 version of it, it's not valid for the spell.
Eh, I view it exactly the opposite way. If something conjures armor, it has conjured up some armor. In fact, I'm cool with someone casting magic vestment on mage armor (invisible but tangible field of force). Especially in PFS magic vestment a) isn't a huge bonus and b) isn't something you can count on unless you can cast it yourself. It's usually better to just spend the 4000 gp for an always-available +2.
Mind you, there are plenty of situations in which armor made of bones or swirling darkness is totally inappropriate. If you are going to a fancy dress party at the Taldan Embassy a shiny mithral breastplate with heraldry or invisible mage armor will be acceptable. Bones? Not so much.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Magic vestment enhances the armor of the target. So your cloths now give an armor bonus = to 0 + enhancement.
and mage armor and bracers of armor make a force field around you, and the wind blessing, lets you create an invisible shell of air. These and the the other oracle abilities to "make armor" are not armor in the armor table and thus I say aren't valid targets for magic vestment, and I will rule thusly until forced to change. If I couldn't make a +1 version of it, it's not valid for the spell.
Eh, I view it exactly the opposite way. If something conjures armor, it has conjured up some armor. In fact, I'm cool with someone casting magic vestment on mage armor (invisible but tangible field of force). Especially in PFS magic vestment a) isn't a huge bonus and b) isn't something you can count on unless you can cast it yourself. It's usually better to just spend the 4000 gp for an always-available +2.
Mind you, there are plenty of situations in which armor made of bones or swirling darkness is totally inappropriate. If you are going to a fancy dress party at the Taldan Embassy a shiny mithral breastplate with heraldry or invisible mage armor will be acceptable. Bones? Not so much.
What if the Embassy is in the Nidal?
|
|
I will rule thusly until forced to change.
I don't think anybody will "force" you to rule differently, but it sounds like your reasoning is just because you don't like it.
The biggest combined effect by 11th level would be a total of +10, the same bonus as +1 Fullplate, which is only 2650gp.
That may require a feat, but feats are basically equivalent to revelations, which is what Armor of Bones is.
Is it really that much to strike such a hard stance against?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would be forced to rule differently if PFS leadership or the PDT says it works.
It's not that "I don't like it" it's that I don't think those abilities are valid targets for the spell.
Plus your example isn't fair, +1 fullplate may give 10AC, but it also has a dex cap of 1 and a solid ACP max AC of 11. Getting 10 AC with no dex cap and no ACP from this is something no item can grant. (bracers come the closest at +8 for a lot of gold.)
But the plus side of my view is that since it's not "armor" it wont stop a monk from having that AC and not losing his powers.
|
|
But the plus side of my view is that since it's not "armor" it wont stop a monk from having that AC and not losing his powers.*headscratch*
Aren't you the only one saying it's not armor, though?
only one out of the 6 peoples who've answered this question. Sample size is far to low to know if my view is 1/10, 1/100, 1/1000, or 1/everyone.
|
|
My thinking would be:
Can you cast Magic Vestments on armor created by Instant Armor or Summon Armor?
If yes, then you can cast it on Armor of Bones, Armor of Ice, or Armor of Wood. The fact that they're really good armor (no ACP, no Max Dex) is not a factor in determining if they're armor.
Furthermore, while I agree with BNW's reasoning, I think that I would feel obligated to apply that ruling to all armor revelations. The Shadow, Spirit, Ectoplasm, etc. because they provide Armor bonuses, not Deflection bonuses, and I feel it would be unfair of me to arbitrarily penalize a player in PFS for the flavor of Oracle they chose to play (the non-physical ones grant less useful side bonuses in my estimation anyhow).
|
I'm of the opinion that magic vestment should apply or not apply to all the oracle revelation "armors". I lean towards not because most of them don't sound like armor and even armor of bones, it's really magic that is providing the bonus and not the physical aspect of it, given that it scales with oracle level.
For those that think that armor of bones can be the target of magic vestment, do you also think enemies should be able to sunder it?
|
|
For those that think that armor of bones can be the target of magic vestment, do you also think enemies should be able to sunder it?
Interesting question!
I lean towards "yes" but there's no hardness or hp listed for it, so there's no easy way to answer the question of "How do you sunder it?" I don't think it's a tactic an NPC would ever use (edge case, edge case, etc.) but I'd allow it if a PC tried to sunder the armor of an NPC oracle. I'd probably use the hp and hardness of an armor close to the same armor bonus.
Bear in mind if it does get sundered, all it takes is a standard action to bring it back at full strength (minus any enhancement from magic vestment and assuming you still have hours per day left).
|
Venture-Captain, Pennsylvania—Pittsburgh
|
I do find it amusing that the (still somehow completely weightless) armor didn't have hardness or HP until Ultimate Equipment came out, when it suddenly gained those statistics. ^_^
I wonder how it worked when the APG was first released...
Pneumatized bird bones filled with just enough helium to be weight-neutral... since I'm sure nobody ever thought this much about it.
|
|
Now to go cast haste on my spiritual allies. They're kind of like creatures, after all. Close enough.
Actually, I'm OK with that, too. It does create a "construct of pure force." Although (like with the armor/vestment issue) I'm not going to throw a fit if another GM disallows it.
That does remind me that you can cast greater magic weapon on a spiritual weapon per this FAQ entry.
Ray: Do rays count as weapons for the purpose of spells and effects that affect weapons?
Yes. (See also this FAQ item for a similar question about rays and weapon feats.)For example, a bard's inspire courage says it affects "weapon damage rolls," which is worded that way so don't try to add the bonus to a spell like fireball. However, rays are treated as weapons, whether they're from spells, a monster ability, a class ability, or some other source, so the inspire courage bonus applies to ray attack rolls and ray damage rolls.
The same rule applies to weapon-like spells such as flame blade, mage's sword, and spiritual weapon--effects that affect weapons work on these spells.
It really comes down to whether you consider that FAQ "complete" or "extensible." If its complete it only applies to spells that act as weapons. If it's extensible you can then carry the explanation over into magic that makes armors or creatures.
|
Designer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a note, that weapon and spell FAQ has in some cases been superseded by the more complete and more recent FAQ that is more expansive in what it handles than rays and is more nuanced than the final line in that FAQ. Most notably "Abilities like Arcane Strike that specifically enhance a character’s weapon or weapons themselves never apply to special abilities (with the exception of special abilities like the warlock’s mystic bolts that specifically call out that Arcane Strike applies)."
|
As a note, that weapon and spell FAQ has in some cases been superseded by the more complete and more recent FAQ that is more expansive in what it handles than rays and is more nuanced than the final line in that FAQ. Most notably "Abilities like Arcane Strike that specifically enhance a character’s weapon or weapons themselves never apply to special abilities (with the exception of special abilities like the warlock’s mystic bolts that specifically call out that Arcane Strike applies)."
It is interesting that he did not however weigh in on the subject of Armor of Bones and Magical Vestment...
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a note, that weapon and spell FAQ has in some cases been superseded by the more complete and more recent FAQ that is more expansive in what it handles than rays and is more nuanced than the final line in that FAQ. Most notably "Abilities like Arcane Strike that specifically enhance a character’s weapon or weapons themselves never apply to special abilities (with the exception of special abilities like the warlock’s mystic bolts that specifically call out that Arcane Strike applies)."It is interesting that he did not however weigh in on the subject of Armor of Bones and Magical Vestment...
We don't have a FAQ for that yet, so that's why. I'd need to weigh in on it as Rogue Eidolon because otherwise people sometimes mistake my posts for being official rulings.
EDIT: Talonhawke's got it :)
Well considering he just said this on another thread.....
No personal designer posts are official, whether or not they were before the PDT account was created (Stephen posted to that effect, I think after something in a Mounted Combat thread that I was participating in as a fan at the time). You don't need to search for any of our old posts. That said, the PFS staff official posts are binding, as others have said above.You should follow any SKR ruling from before the Pathfinder Design Team account was created. As those are 'official'. Also, you must follow any post by the Pathfinder Design Team, those are as official as FAQs. Though, that account is usually used to declare a FAQ was posted.So, I still confusd.
I "should" follow SKR, jason...'s word.
OR
I make the rule more "clear" by their word.Different between them are "Should or not"
If in PF, I can ask my GM.
But in PFS, GM "should" follow the rule, no matter personal will.