Repercussions of July 18 armor pricing FAQ


Pathfinder Society

1 to 50 of 328 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Sczarni 5/5 ⦵⦵

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Q: Cost Multipliers for Items: When an item has a cost multiplier, for instance for its size, unusual shape, or composition, does that apply before or after additional costs such as for making the item masterwork or using a special material?
A: All cost multipliers apply after you add up the total cost of the item before the multiplier. For example, a chain shirt costs 100 gp and a mithral chain shirt costs 1,100 gp after the +1,000 gp cost for mithral. If you were applying the 1/3 cost multiplier for crafting the item using the Craft skill, the cost multiplier from Table 6-8 based on size and body type, or both, you would apply those multipliers to the full 1,100 gp cost for the mithral chain shirt. This means a mithral chain shirt built for a rune giant costs 8,800 gp and a mithral chain shirt built for the tarrasque costs 35,200 gp.

For PFS, this is a complicated FAQ. For years players have been pricing armor for unusual creatures using a less pricey formula (Mithral Kikko horse barding, for example, was commonly priced at 5,000gp. Now it's 17,000gp).

But besides that, this FAQ means that pricing tiny-sized armor out of Special Materials is actually cheaper now. And there's the addition of the Fitting enchantment. I can foresee many PCs running around with tiny-sized Mithral Fullplate enchanted with Fitting simply because it's actually cheaper than medium-sized +1 Mithral Fullplate.

Can we have the Leadership team evaluate how this may impact PFS play?

Shadow Lodge

lol thats hilarious

Scarab Sages 5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

Fitting also lets you get armor for your hatchling before they have their growth spurt around level 4 or 7 without having to replace it later on.

Sczarni 5/5 ⦵⦵

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber

*imagines a PC's backstory to include how their parents trained them to wear armor before they could walk*

Scarab Sages 5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

Nefreet wrote:
*imagines a PC's backstory to include how their parents trained them to wear armor before they could walk*

I didn't have the heart to the orcish parents that you bronze the booties AFTER the baby is out of them. (Thankfully i talked them into a resist fire spell first)

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵

Just realized that my CORE Paladin has to fork over another +3000gp for his large-sized Adamantine Bastard Sword.

That's going to be difficult, because I doubt I can *use* the sword during the scenarios I'll have to play in order to save up that much gold.

1/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I... I'm not sure how to handle this.

Paizo Employee 5/5 Pathfinder Society Lead Developer

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:
Can we have the Leadership team evaluate how this may impact PFS play?

We've been briefed on the FAQ and discussed our preliminary thoughts. I have little reason not to believe this FAQ would extend to organized play; the question is more how to resolve cost correction and match the intentions of the ruling.

The Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Guide covers the basics of what to do in this case: "If the price of an item becomes more expensive, you must sell back the affected equipment at its original full market value based on its remaining number of charges (if any). So long as you have enough gp and Fame, you can purchase the same item at its updated cost." Beyond the considerable difference in price for heavier armor types, does this general rule overlook something?

As for the fitting enchantment, I'm looking at what has been a fairly innocuous armor special ability and seeing a very inexpensive backdoor to circumvent the FAQ and design team altogether. That doesn't strike me as right, and it makes me seriously question whether that special ability (entirely sound when published) remains a good fit for the campaign.

1/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
John Compton wrote:


As for the fitting enchantment, I'm looking at what has been a fairly innocuous armor special ability and seeing a very inexpensive backdoor to circumvent the FAQ and design team altogether. That doesn't strike me as right, and it makes me seriously question whether that special ability (entirely sound when published) remains a good fit for the campaign.

Perhaps a restriction of 'must be within one size class' might be a viable alternative to outright removing it as an option?

EDIT: Alternatively, increasing the price of the enchantment to 'whatever the standard is'?

Paizo Employee 5/5 Pathfinder Society Lead Developer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
John Compton wrote:


As for the fitting enchantment, I'm looking at what has been a fairly innocuous armor special ability and seeing a very inexpensive backdoor to circumvent the FAQ and design team altogether. That doesn't strike me as right, and it makes me seriously question whether that special ability (entirely sound when published) remains a good fit for the campaign.
Perhaps a restriction of 'must be within one size class' might be a viable alternative to outright removing it as an option?

At which point it's still functioning primarily as a discount whose cost is that of the Pathfinder Player Companion: Giant Hunter's Handbook cover price, right?

Quote:

EDIT: Alternatively, increasing the price of the enchantment to 'whatever the standard is'?

That might make sense, though I don't know what that cost would be.

As it stands, I'm trying to discern what the fitting special ability's primary audience is. It seems like it's a) for someone with a low-level animal companion that will grow in size naturally in a few more character levels and b) for someone who found a really awesome giant-sized armor that they want to shrink down to size. "A" seems to have some value in organized play, whereas "B" seems far less relevant in this play format.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

John Compton wrote:


As it stands, I'm trying to discern what the fitting special ability's primary audience is. It seems like it's a) for someone with a low-level animal companion that will grow in size naturally in a few more character levels and b) for someone who found a really awesome giant-sized armor that they want to shrink down to size. "A" seems to have some value in organized play, whereas "B" seems far less relevant in this play format.

c) A non druid that changes sizes in non humanoid shapes. Wild armor (problems with it being vastly over priced aside) only works on wild shape. It doesn't work on polymorph spells or very similar abilities like the lunar oracle's form of the beast.

C,1) druids that can't afford wild armor yet and stay in one basic shape: wolf dire wolf Deinochus/velociraptor. Very handy when you want to shrink down to let the other melee at the table through

Paizo Employee 5/5 Pathfinder Society Lead Developer

BigNorseWolf wrote:
John Compton wrote:


As it stands, I'm trying to discern what the fitting special ability's primary audience is. It seems like it's a) for someone with a low-level animal companion that will grow in size naturally in a few more character levels and b) for someone who found a really awesome giant-sized armor that they want to shrink down to size. "A" seems to have some value in organized play, whereas "B" seems far less relevant in this play format.

c) A non druid that changes sizes in non humanoid shapes. Wild armor (problems with it being vastly over priced aside) only works on wild shape. It doesn't work on polymorph spells or very similar abilities like the lunar oracle's form of the beast.

For example a transmuter who casts giant shape I? Although there are forms for which armor melds into the body automatically (i.e. animal, dragon, elemental, magical beast, plant, or vermin type), forms such as humanoid and monstrous humanoid keep their gear and have it resize automatically as part of the spell.

I imagine what you're getting at is someone who casts a longer-term spell of the polymorph subschool while not wearing armor and then dons the armor in the new form?

Quote:
C,1) druids that can't afford wild armor yet and stay in one basic shape: wolf dire wolf Deinochus/velociraptor

Same sort of process here?

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

John Compton wrote:
I imagine what you're getting at is someone who casts a longer-term spell of the polymorph subschool while not wearing armor and then dons the armor in the new form?

Eyup.

Quote:
C,1) druids that can't afford wild armor yet and stay in one basic shape: wolf dire wolf Deinochus/velociraptor
Same sort of process here?

Eyup.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Does it make sense to make a Campaign Clarification that the Fitting property can only be placed on armor appropriately sized for the size of your base form, or that of your current companion? I doubt we're going to see weird corner cases of "I got myself an imp familiar for cheaper armor."

This shouldn't adversely affect either of the cases that BNW brings up

The Concordance Venture-Agent, Utah—Logan aka ShieldLawrence

Guess I'll need to wait on my large companion classes until the campaign decides on the ruling for fitting.

Paizo Employee 5/5 Pathfinder Society Lead Developer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Serisan wrote:

Does it make sense to make a Campaign Clarification that the Fitting property can only be placed on armor appropriately sized for the size of your base form, or that of your current companion? I doubt we're going to see weird corner cases of "I got myself an imp familiar for cheaper armor."

This shouldn't adversely affect either of the cases that BNW brings up

That's approximately what I'm thinking right now.

Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo aka Chess Pwn

John Compton wrote:
The Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Guide covers the basics of what to do in this case: "If the price of an item becomes more expensive, you must sell back the affected equipment at its original full market value based on its remaining number of charges (if any). So long as you have enough gp and Fame, you can purchase the same item at its updated cost." Beyond the considerable difference in price for heavier armor types, does this general rule overlook something?

This WAS in the year 7 guide, but it is not in the year 8 guide. Hence the need to ask for every item change until we get official word that the year 7 wording is still valid. So I guess I'm kinda asking, does this count as official that it should be considered still in the season 8 guide? (for the few weeks it's still the guide)

Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo aka Chess Pwn

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm a little sad that the first reaction to the change is finding more stuff to change (nerf) for characters that are negatively affected by this FAQ.

a lion companion has AC of 22 at lv9
masterwork studded leather gives +3 ac for 1300 and no feats
for mithral breatplate to keep their dex AC it costs 2 feats and 16,800 for 6 AC. 16,000 is the cost of +4 armor, that's quite expensive just for some armor for a companion. Fitting just makes it affordable option again. Like most characters looking into this are already buying for 2.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Okay, I'm going to be really blunt about this.

I realize I'm probably the extreme minority of the extreme minority of players here, with both a huge companion and a boon used for special material, so I don't expect much of it, but I'm a bit salty about the FAQ.

I'm looking for ways to NOT pay 84.000 gp to keep my companions boon using armor, but from all the looks it seems that to keep the armor affordable

From what I'm reading however, I'm going to have to ditch the noqual modifier, and just make it a magical armor.

So here goes, I have 24150 gp to work with and I'll lose the +2 saves vs spells and spell-like abilities
Huge non-humanoid masterwork fullplate: 13.200 gp
Enchanting it: +1 1000 gp (will also make up for only getting +1 from dex instead of +2)
Comfort enchantment +5000 gp (no more needing to take it off, my mammoth can now sleep in it)
Deathless: +3000 gp (energy resistance positive/negative 10, 25% chance to ignore negative levels from any attack, does not block healing)

This makes it a huge non-humanoid +1 Comfort Deathless Fullplate costing me 22200 gp. I'm probably gonna dump some of the leftover cash I have to raise it to +2, which would cost me 5000 gp.

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

Since the FAQ does not make a sample of a masterwork barding, I am forced to assume that the masterwork cost would be multiplied for large or larger animal companions... I need to adjust some characters.

Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo aka Chess Pwn

yup, the FAQ specifically mentions that masterwork is multiplied, just not in the examples.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber

They may not have given it as an example, but the FAQ does specifically mention master or special materials as added costs before multiplying.

In fact, the only special materials that are not affected are Bone, and Dragonhide, because they have a different wording;
Bone: The cost of a bone weapon or bone armor is half the price of a normal weapon or armor of its type.
Dragonhide: Dragonhide armor costs twice as much as masterwork armor of that type

Though you could argue that they have gone up in price now that masterwork also needs to be multiplied.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As an alternative to restricting the Fitting enchantment to your own character's size, the enchantment could be errata'd that it doesn't remove the footnote that tiny or smaller armor divides the armor bonus provided by two.

Wanna buy a suit of tiny mithral fullplate?

Sure, but it'll only give you a +4 armor bonus.

Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo aka Chess Pwn

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Look, the point of stuff is to make it so players want to use it, or "light ban" it by making it so unattractive players wont go for it. "Technically" allowing something, but making it so bad that no one should want to is basically the same as just removing the option, so I feel for suggestions that aren't "ban it" they should be things that you'd seriously consider taking for a relevant character, any character with an animal companion. If it's so bad still that with those kinds of characters that the option is for, that you'd hardly consider it and just decide it was a bad option, then it's not really a good suggestion but is just a suggestion to "ban it".

Like if you can't find a justification for getting full plate on an animal then it's a banned option.
if you can't find a reason someone would pick the tiny mithral fullplate over a chainshirt then there's no reason to suggest that option cause it's useless as it's effectively just banning the option.

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden aka Ascalaphus

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 4 people marked this as a favorite.

To extract a few key points:


  • Nobody wants Tiny Fitting Mithral to be the new thing.
  • Making alternate-material armor for plus-sized companions prohibitively expensive isn't necessarily the aim either. For them, the Fitting enchantment currently provides a cap on pricing.
  • Small and Medium armor costs the same. (CRB)
  • Fitting will not prevent barding from becoming more expensive due to this new FAQ.

    For a huge companion, Fitting is now the difference between 2x and 8x normal price. It's never a free ride.

Here then is my compromise proposal:

Fitting can only be placed on Small or larger armor.

This would provide an upper bound on costs for plus-sized companion armor, but also prevent tiny fitting armor cheese.

The only possible cheese I see remaining is that there can be a slight price difference between small and medium armors when the special material has a per-pound price, but remember that this only matters if that difference significantly exceeds the cost of fitting (2000gp).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber

So, I'd be able to buy a medium humanoid +1 fitting noqual fullplate (1.500 armor + 150 masterwork + 12.000 noqual + 5.000 noqual extra cost for enchanting + 1.000 enchanting + 2.000 fitting) for 21650 and get my huge mammoth to wear it?

Or do I have to go for a medium non-humanoid version which will run me 13.650 extra for a total of 35.300, which is still affordable, I should have enough gold spare to afford that.

I cannot afford the difference between the price I currently paid (24.650) and what it's under the few FAQ (109.200, which incidently is more than the wealth by level of a 12th level character).

1/5

So how does this work with Cold Iron? If multipliers applied after the static increases, a masterwork cold iron longsword would cost 660gp ((300+15)*2) Given that it has been officially printed as costing 330gp...

Dark Archive 4/5

I like Lau's idea; it's simple and locks the Tiny armor cheese away, without harming the current situation any further.

I do have a small rule thingy to state though. Fitting states that it grows/shrinks to the size of the person that picks it up. For barding this means that you'll need a way of casting something like Serren's Swift Girding to properly suit up your critter after it has touched the barding. Otherwise it will shrink to your size, instead of the size of your critter. Minor detail, but had to mention it anyway.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber
shaventalz wrote:
So how does this work with Cold Iron? If multipliers applied after the static increases, a masterwork cold iron longsword would cost 660gp ((300+15)*2) Given that it has been officially printed as costing 330gp...

It'll have to be changed to be 660 gp.

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden aka Ascalaphus

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Damanta wrote:

So, I'd be able to buy a medium humanoid +1 fitting noqual fullplate (1.500 armor + 150 masterwork + 12.000 noqual + 5.000 noqual extra cost for enchanting + 1.000 enchanting + 2.000 fitting) for 21650 and get my huge mammoth to wear it?

Or do I have to go for a medium non-humanoid version which will run me 13.650 extra for a total of 35.300, which is still affordable, I should have enough gold spare to afford that.

I cannot afford the difference between the price I currently paid (24.650) and what it's under the few FAQ (109.200, which incidently is more than the wealth by level of a 12th level character).

You'd still pay the premium for nonhumanoid shape, because Fitting only mentions size not shape.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Lau Bannenberg wrote:
Damanta wrote:

So, I'd be able to buy a medium humanoid +1 fitting noqual fullplate (1.500 armor + 150 masterwork + 12.000 noqual + 5.000 noqual extra cost for enchanting + 1.000 enchanting + 2.000 fitting) for 21650 and get my huge mammoth to wear it?

Or do I have to go for a medium non-humanoid version which will run me 13.650 extra for a total of 35.300, which is still affordable, I should have enough gold spare to afford that.

I cannot afford the difference between the price I currently paid (24.650) and what it's under the few FAQ (109.200, which incidently is more than the wealth by level of a 12th level character).

You'd still pay the premium for nonhumanoid shape, because Fitting only mentions size not shape.

Meh, I can live with that. 10.650 extra vs 84.000 extra. The 10k I can spare, the 84k I can't :P

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden aka Ascalaphus

Mr. Bonkers wrote:

I like Lau's idea; it's simple and locks the Tiny armor cheese away, without harming the current situation any further.

I do have a small rule thingy to state though. Fitting states that it grows/shrinks to the size of the person that picks it up. For barding this means that you'll need a way of casting something like Serren's Swift Girding to properly suit up your critter after it has touched the barding. Otherwise it will shrink to your size, instead of the size of your critter. Minor detail, but had to mention it anyway.

I don't think this is such a problem, particularly on armor that has multiple components, as long as you can attach at least one part to the companion.

Full Plate normally comes with gauntlets for example. I assume that full plate mammoth barding would also have something you can attach to the tusks. So you tentatively hang it from the tusk (still undersize). Now the mammoth is wearing the armor, all of it sizes up, and you can fit the rest on him because your touch no longer causes shrinkage.

Dark Archive 4/5

Lau Bannenberg wrote:
Mr. Bonkers wrote:

I like Lau's idea; it's simple and locks the Tiny armor cheese away, without harming the current situation any further.

I do have a small rule thingy to state though. Fitting states that it grows/shrinks to the size of the person that picks it up. For barding this means that you'll need a way of casting something like Serren's Swift Girding to properly suit up your critter after it has touched the barding. Otherwise it will shrink to your size, instead of the size of your critter. Minor detail, but had to mention it anyway.

I don't think this is such a problem, particularly on armor that has multiple components, as long as you can attach at least one part to the companion.

Full Plate normally comes with gauntlets for example. I assume that full plate mammoth barding would also have something you can attach to the tusks. So you tentatively hang it from the tusk (still undersize). Now the mammoth is wearing the armor, all of it sizes up, and you can fit the rest on him because your touch no longer causes shrinkage.

There are workarounds for sure, just need to be able to properly role-play it. But if you have a stuck-up GM, the wand cost 2PP (or buy a scroll and use Damanta's Comfort armor idea, then it only costs 25gp for a single use).

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

the subjects....and must be able to properly fit into the chosen armor.

That won't work

3/5

Damanta wrote:
shaventalz wrote:
So how does this work with Cold Iron? If multipliers applied after the static increases, a masterwork cold iron longsword would cost 660gp ((300+15)*2) Given that it has been officially printed as costing 330gp...
It'll have to be changed to be 660 gp.

... and then of course, there's the Masterwork Transformation option...

Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo aka Chess Pwn

TimD wrote:
Damanta wrote:
shaventalz wrote:
So how does this work with Cold Iron? If multipliers applied after the static increases, a masterwork cold iron longsword would cost 660gp ((300+15)*2) Given that it has been officially printed as costing 330gp...
It'll have to be changed to be 660 gp.

... and then of course, there's the Masterwork Transformation option...

which says you need to pay gold for the amount it would take to masterwork. So a large weapon takes 600gp for that spell

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.

masterwork transformation won't go around it.

The material component for the spell is magical reagents worth the cost difference between a normal item and the equivalent masterwork item (typically 300 gp for a weapon, 150 gp for armor, or 50 gp for a tool).

being written by puny medium bipeds, they consider "typically" for a bipedal medium humanoid. With the new cost difference , you'd have to pay more.

Venture-Agent, Utah—Provo aka Chess Pwn

Damanta wrote:
Lau Bannenberg wrote:
Damanta wrote:

So, I'd be able to buy a medium humanoid +1 fitting noqual fullplate (1.500 armor + 150 masterwork + 12.000 noqual + 5.000 noqual extra cost for enchanting + 1.000 enchanting + 2.000 fitting) for 21650 and get my huge mammoth to wear it?

Or do I have to go for a medium non-humanoid version which will run me 13.650 extra for a total of 35.300, which is still affordable, I should have enough gold spare to afford that.

I cannot afford the difference between the price I currently paid (24.650) and what it's under the few FAQ (109.200, which incidently is more than the wealth by level of a 12th level character).

You'd still pay the premium for nonhumanoid shape, because Fitting only mentions size not shape.
Meh, I can live with that. 10.650 extra vs 84.000 extra. The 10k I can spare, the 84k I can't :P

this to me is the prime example of why is so dumb rule, that the base armor now is more than the entire life savings of a quite high level charcter. They effective said, "no large+ gear of spacial materials are allowed."

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento aka FLite

Do I understand correctly that the cost of enchanting the item is not effected by the multiplier?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Jared Thaler wrote:
Do I understand correctly that the cost of enchanting the item is not effected by the multiplier?

Correct, it's just for sizing.

Grand Lodge

For the fitting enhancement it mentions size, but does it also adjust shape? Since that could be very useful for druids who purchase barding/armor for their wild shape forms and cannot yet afford the wild enhancement.

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Yet another FAQ that seems to punish people using AC. Getting rid of the Fitting enchantment will just make people with ACs even more disadvantaged on top of the magic item rules. It also means taking Mammoth Rider becomes a terrible fit for PFS due to gold limitations.

Why does campaign leadership hate my wolf?

1/5

Jötunn Dragonborn wrote:

Just realized that my CORE Paladin has to fork over another +3000gp for his large-sized Adamantine Bastard Sword.

That's going to be difficult, because I doubt I can *use* the sword during the scenarios I'll have to play in order to save up that much gold.

This is a very sad thing. I am in a similar situation with my Large size Rhoka (12 lbs right in the same size as other medium size two-hand weapons).

I understand for simplicity sake it needs to be ruled all the same, but because of this ruling, I could decide I want a Huge size DAGGER (why I don't know, but that's not the point), which would weigh a whole 5 lbs and be smaller than all standard two-handed weapons I am aware of, but it would cost me 4(2+3000)=12,008gp

Most materials scale on either weight, armor/weapon category, or original price of item, but adamantine (for weapons) now just became much more unique in pricing.

This change puts me in a weird spot of how to deal with it. I invested 1500gp to get rhoka familiarity and 4000gp to remove the oversized penalty already, I'm not sure it is worth it to add 3000gp more on top of the already cost of the weapon. I was doing it to get a two-handed 2d6 18-20x2 weapon and that increase of 1 extra crit range from a greatsword (EDIT: or 2d4 to 2d6 upgrade from falchion) was costing me 5500gp already, Now I have to either fork over an additional 3000gp, making it 8500gp over the greatsword, or sell off my 1500gp and 4000gp items for half (because they are not part of the buyback system) and just switch to a greatsword, which has less crit range and impacts the build I had "relying", on the increased crit range with improved crit feat. OH AND I will need to retrain both my weapon focus and improved crit feats to the greatsword if I do it that way.

I understand my situation is rather corner-case just like Damanta and isn't nearly as expensive of a difference (though I had a theoretical build I was starting that would have been impacted similar to his that might be canned now), but I wanted to share because of the weirder implications this ruling has on unusual size adamantine weapons since it does not scale in some way like most materials.

Tl;Dr
This does weird things for adamantine weapon pricing.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It does not adjust shape. You'd have to be the same shape. Definitely worth if if you have a druid with a theme going, like a fox a wolf and a dire wolf or small kitty large kitty dire kitty. You more or less have to plan that per map/encounter though, as if you shift at all the armor gets absorbed, but still worth the grand. YOu say "oh , the open plains..." assume giant kitty form, pick up the barding, have the party help you into it. You come to a hole in the ground "party go down da hole..." have barding taken off assume medium kitty form pick up armor have the party put it on.

Silver Crusade

I'm so glad my only PC with an animal companion has a small critter who will be medium sized when she grows up.


JDLPF wrote:

As an alternative to restricting the Fitting enchantment to your own character's size, the enchantment could be errata'd that it doesn't remove the footnote that tiny or smaller armor divides the armor bonus provided by two.

Wanna buy a suit of tiny mithral fullplate?

Sure, but it'll only give you a +4 armor bonus.

Would a Fitting Small Mithral Fullplate then give the full +9 armor bonus to a tiny creature?

3/5 Venture-Agent, Georgia—Atlanta

Regarding the "fitting" issue, the wording is "A fitting shield or suit of armor instantly shrinks or grows to suit the size of any creature that picks it up unless it is currently worn by another creature. It reverts to its original size 1 round after it leaves that creature’s possession." By my reading, this would preclude using fitting for a companion or mount, since of course they can't "pick it up." If the PC picks it up in order to place it on their companion, it will change to the PC's size, not the mount's.

The cheese solution to this would be for the PC to Enlarge Person beforehand (how long does it take to don armor? and how long for barding? - a new corner of the rulebook that we never used to need to pay attention to, that now may become relevant - will we see people casting Extended Enlarge Person so they have enough time to get their large kitties into their enlarged barding?) so that the fitting barding grows to Large, and then put it on the Large companion.

With these considerations in mind, my hope is that if Fitting remains PFS-legal, there is a Campaign Clarification that helps keep it a useful tweak for a few specific designs (such as the ones that BNW mentioned upthread), rather than the obligatory enchantment for every single companion/mount.

Also, as someone with multiple companions/mounts who have taken advantage of the more lenient pricing in the past, I don't have a problem with this FAQ. It shouldn't be easier/cheaper to make your companion/mount harder to hit than your PC.


Abraham Z. wrote:

Regarding the "fitting" issue, the wording is "A fitting shield or suit of armor instantly shrinks or grows to suit the size of any creature that picks it up unless it is currently worn by another creature. It reverts to its original size 1 round after it leaves that creature’s possession." By my reading, this would preclude using fitting for a companion or mount, since of course they can't "pick it up." If the PC picks it up in order to place it on their companion, it will change to the PC's size, not the mount's.

The cheese solution to this would be for the PC to Enlarge Person beforehand (how long does it take to don armor? and how long for barding? - a new corner of the rulebook that we never used to need to pay attention to, that now may become relevant - will we see people casting Extended Enlarge Person so they have enough time to get their large kitties into their enlarged barding?) so that the fitting barding grows to Large, and then put it on the Large companion.

Wait so your claiming that you have to use a humanoid (or worse sapient humanoid) hand to be considered picking something up?

Scarab Sages 2/5

RIP Animal Companions that can take a hit.

3/5 Venture-Agent, Georgia—Atlanta

Talonhawke wrote:
Abraham Z. wrote:

Regarding the "fitting" issue, the wording is "A fitting shield or suit of armor instantly shrinks or grows to suit the size of any creature that picks it up unless it is currently worn by another creature. It reverts to its original size 1 round after it leaves that creature’s possession." By my reading, this would preclude using fitting for a companion or mount, since of course they can't "pick it up." If the PC picks it up in order to place it on their companion, it will change to the PC's size, not the mount's.

The cheese solution to this would be for the PC to Enlarge Person beforehand (how long does it take to don armor? and how long for barding? - a new corner of the rulebook that we never used to need to pay attention to, that now may become relevant - will we see people casting Extended Enlarge Person so they have enough time to get their large kitties into their enlarged barding?) so that the fitting barding grows to Large, and then put it on the Large companion.

Wait so your claiming that you have to use a humanoid (or worse sapient humanoid) hand to be considered picking something up?

Yeah, I guess that is the implication. Right after I posted it occurred to me that someone might say, "my Large tiger grabs the Medium +1 Fitting Mithral Breastplate Barding in its jaws - presto, it is now Large size - now my PC helps the Tiger don its Large barding." I suppose that I read "pick it up" here as "manipulate in order to wear" rather than simply "have physical contact with", but there's no RAW to support that. On the other hand, unless you want to argue that the PC can help the Tiger don the Large barding without the barding ever leaving contact with the Tiger for more than 6 seconds (which I suppose someone might argue), it seems to me that even if the Tiger holding the barding in its jaws is sufficient to trigger Fitting, as soon as the PC takes the barding to help the Tiger don it, the Fitting quality should cause it to revert to the PC's size. The cheesey solution to this would be to cast Enlarge Person on the PC before helping the Tiger. (How long does it take to don barding? Maybe Extended Enlarge Person).

Thankfully, I suspect that we'll get a Campaign Clarification rendering all of this moot. Or at least I hope so.

1 to 50 of 328 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Repercussions of July 18 armor pricing FAQ All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.