If there is nothing to reduce, then no reduction takes place... that is correct.
|
I will not have it work against natural armor enhancements, but I think it will work if the human gets a natural armor bonus, even through magic.
In every instance, it will not give a negative value to a creature natural armor.
A creature "normal full natural armor score." doesn't reference anything defined in the game, so it is unclear if it means the natural armor value you get from your type, from your type plus non magical effects that increase your NA bonus (feats and class abilities) or your type plus non magical effects plus magical enhancements.
Why would it not work against Natural Armour Enhancements? If you have a Natural Armour bonus then this wouod reduce it. If a Human is wearing a +2 Amulet of Natural Armour then Flensing Strike should be able to reduce that Natural Armour by up to 2 points (to a minimimum of 0).
But no if they don't have a NA bonus then it won't work.
|
|
The problem isWhy would it not work against Natural Armour Enhancements? If you have a Natural Armour bonus then this wouod reduce it. If a Human is wearing a +2 Amulet of Natural Armour then Flensing Strike should be able to reduce that Natural Armour by up to 2 points (to a minimimum of 0).
But no if they don't have a NA bonus then it won't work.
... the penalty to natural armor does stack, to a maximum penalty equal to the target’s normal full natural armor score.
That normal seems to assume that the limit is less than the total natural armor value in some instances. Or it can be a meaningless word.
An Enhancement to natural armor is a different bonus type from the creature's natural armor or they wouldn't stack and it is applied to the current value of the creature natural armor (or they would have strange effects if the creature Polymorph).
So how it works?
You reduce the creature natural armor to 0 when you hit it and then you apply the enhancement, or you reduce the creature total natural armor value?
What happens if you increase the creature natural armor or the natural armor enhancement after it has been fleansed?
As the "normal full natural armor score" can't be reduced below zero the enhancement is added to 0, bringing it to the value of the enhancement.
It becomes funny when you cast barkskin on a guy that was already benefitting from barkskin if the bonus, enhancement included, was reduced to zero. Now you are getting fewer benefits as the spell is applied as if the natural AC was a negative value.
I don't know what was the writer intended effect and the addition of that "normal" raise some question on the idea that Flensing strike was meant to affect the total natural armor value.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Normal meaning not the reduced amount they currently have after being hit by a Flensing Strike.
I'm with MrCharisma here - the "normal" only refers to the NA bonus before reduction.
Does the reduction of natural armor not work against creatures with no natural armor bonus, i.e. humans or elves?
If it worked independent of the existing natural armor bonus, there would be no reason to have it even mention natural armor in the first place, as it could just be a AC penalty.
As almost always the case in Pathfinder, a reduction can't bring a bonus below zero, or a penalty above zero.
Yeah "total" might have been a better word to use, but I think "normal" works too.
They needed some way of clarifying that you could lose your entire NA bonus, not just half.
If it just said:
... to a maximum penalty equal to the target’snormal fullnatural armor score.
... you'd have a situation where someone would say: "My NA bonus is usually +6. I've taken a -3 penalty, and now I have a +3 NA bonus left, which means the penalty is equal to my bonus and it can't go any lower."
I don't know if they used the best phrasing (it's obviously caused some confusion) but it clears that issue up.