| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
RAW the answer seems to be no, but the class abilities imply that they should be proficient in medium armor. I also don't know if there's any other precedent for a character being able to gain proficiency in heavy armor without being proficient in medium armor.
A steelblood gains proficiency in heavy armor. A steelblood can cast bloodrager spells while wearing heavy armor without incurring an arcane spell failure chance. This replaces the bloodrager’s armor proficiency.
Bloodragers are proficient with all simple and martial weapons, light armor, medium armor, and shields (except tower shields). A bloodrager can cast bloodrager spells while wearing light armor or medium armor without incurring the normal arcane spell failure chance. This does not affect the arcane spell failure chance for arcane spells received from other classes. Like other arcane spellcasters, a bloodrager wearing heavy armor or wielding a shield incurs a chance of arcane spell failure if the spell in question has somatic components.
At 2nd level, a steelblood moves faster in medium and heavy armor. When wearing medium or heavy armor, a steelblood can move 5 feet faster than normal in that armor, to a maximum of his unencumbered speed.
This ability replaces uncanny dodge.
It doesn't say you lose medium proficiency(or shields for that matter). I think it should have said this alters the bloodrager's armour proficiency, not replaces.
Regardless, anyone who reads the rules that strictly is just being asinine. You get medium armour proficiency.
As written, light armor, medium armor (and shield proficiency, if I'm not mistaken) are replaced with heavy armor proficiency.
I thought there was something stating that any armor proficiency also makes you proficient in all lighter armors, but I can't find anything to back up that thought.
But I call that stupid. Unless you're asking for PFS reasons, any sensible DM shouldn't have a problem with allowing a Steelblood Bloodrager to wear medium armor instead of heavy armor, as if they were proficient with no ASF.
This is for a PFS character, which is why I'm trying to be a stickler...
Now as for shield proficiency - I was assuming "shield proficiency" is different than "armor proficiency", so even if the armor proficiency is replaced, he should remain proficient in shields like a regular bloodrager. The game in general seems to treat armor and shields as separate things - separate AC bonus types, separate proficiency feats, and even the rulebook section is called "Armor and Shields", not just "Armor". This part is less relevant to my character as I'm not planning on using a shield, but I do believe the Steelblood is still proficient in shields.
The intent is clear. And you can pervert the text enough to make it mean what you want it to mean. For PFS, it just depends on how big of jerks your GMs are.
The intent is clear. And you can pervert the text enough to make it mean what you want it to mean. For PFS, it just depends on how big of jerks your GMs are.
aka, you're fine in PFS, they aren't crazy rules people.
The intent is clear. And you can pervert the text enough to make it mean what you want it to mean. For PFS, it just depends on how big of jerks your GMs are.aka, you're fine in PFS, they aren't crazy rules people.
Not in my limited experience either, but I imagine that somewhere out there is that complete jerk PFS GM. Although really, in that case, you probably shouldn't be playing at that table anyway.
Is there any heavy armor that a starting character without Rich Parents or a similar trait can afford?
Out of curiosity, why would you wish to wear medium armor on such a character? Is it an issue of starting wealth?
I was thinking the same thing. I guess there is a chance of needing to wear random armor, like a prison escape and 'borrowing' a guard's armor, but it seems pretty niche.
For starting wealth, the bargain basement heavy armors are 200gp, a scale + Armored kilt is 70 gp and a hide + kilt is 25gp. I can't see a bloodrager SO hard up on cash they can't manage 25gp.
David knott 242: medium armors + armored kilt = heavy armor, so there are several armors that use the heavy armor proficiency that they can buy/use.
Ah yes, how did I overlook the armored kilt combination? I just looked through the list of heavy armors and saw that no starting PC could afford any of them. I even came up with the trick of equipping a 1st level sorcerer in a haramaki plus armored kilt for a recent character.
So I guess you can start out in a heavy armor combination outside of PFS.
Out of curiosity, why would you wish to wear medium armor on such a character? Is it an issue of starting wealth?
30 ft vs 20 ft movement speed, mostly, once I'm able to afford a mithral agile breastplate (I'm just dipping one level so I won't even get up to 25 ft in heavy armor.) The max Dex bonus is also better on medium armor (not relevant for my character but it could be for some,) and of course the armor check penalties are less extreme for medium armors. It's possible also (due to multiclassing or other reasons) you have some ability that doesn't function when you're wearing heavy armor.
RumpinRufus: wouldn't a multiclass combo that has abilities that function in medium only give you medium proficiency? I don't understand what's you lose if it's a 1 level dip...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If it's only a 1 level dip and you're wanting medium armor anyways why are you going with steelblood archetype? Seems like there'd be far better archetypes to use if just doing a 1 level dip.
RumpinRufus: wouldn't a multiclass combo that has abilities that function in medium only give you medium proficiency? I don't understand what's you lose if it's a 1 level dip...
Good point... scratch that one.
If it's only a 1 level dip and you're wanting medium armor anyways why are you going with steelblood archetype? Seems like there'd be far better archetypes to use if just doing a 1 level dip.
For RP reasons I want to the option prestige into Hellknight (although I probably never actually will.) Also, I probably will want to stay in heavy armor, but by the time I can afford a mithral agile breastplate, I'd like to have the option of using one. (It's been so long since I've played a character with slow movement I am hemming and hawing on whether I want to keep the slow movement, especially because the character is built to use tactics and I'm worried that my action economy will suffer without normal movement speed.)
Anyway, this is the Rules Forum! Why do I need an excuse to get bent out of shape about minor arcane details of RAW and RAI? :)
+5000k gold, reduces your mithral breastplate ACP to zero, rendering proficency moot.
Yep, with this and 3 traits to reduce ACP you can wear a lot of armor without proficiency. ;)
PS: If you are allowed drawbacks and campaign feats, you can take all three traits for -3 ACP.
But the specifics of the problem allow me to spend time thinking of other solutions to your problem and thus avoid thinking about my real life problems.
LOL I'm with you there. Working with all the moving pieces of the game is a puzzle that'll keep us distracted for a bit. ;)
Traits that reduce acp? How have I never heard of those...
Armor Expert (Combat), Sargavan Guard (Region/Sargava), Serpent Runner (Campaign) all reduce your ACP 1.
Okay, so the 3 then.
Yep. There are other that reduce it for certain skills like Steady Strength giving a -2 reduction for strength skills in med/heavy armors, but those 3 are the only across the board ones that I know of.
Faceless Enforcer
The language is much clearer there, however. It is clearly intended, as oppose to this which looks like a careless mistake.
Something from the ACG looks like it might be a mistake? Say it's not so! :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is actually an error on Archives of Nethys and D20pfsrd.
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: A steelblood gains proficiency with heavy armor. A steelblood can cast bloodrager spells while wearing heavy armor without incurring an arcane spell failure chance. This ability alters the bloodrager's armor proficiency.
Good catch. Sounds like it must have been handled in the original round of errata.
Thanks, TrinitysEnd!
Good catch. Sounds like it must have been handled in the original round of errata.
I can confirm that my crappy/useless first print of the book says replace, so it must have been snuck into the errata.
... I guess there's no way to un-mark a post for FAQ?
With only three FAQ attempts on it, it won't really matter either way. And I don't know if clicking the FAQ button again does anything.