Waves Oracle Ice Armor and Magic Vestment


Rules Questions

Liberty's Edge

In a game I am playing, there is a waves oracle with Armor of Ice. This ability allows you to conjure "armor of ice" that gives you an armor bonus that varies with level and environmental condition. Only an armor bonus

The target of the Magic Vestment spell is "armor or shield touched" with a special exception for clothing. It grants an enhancement bonus to the armor bonus provided by the armor in question.

The question is of course: Does the 'armor' conjured by the Ice Armor count as a valid target for the Magic Vestment spell?

And to address the inevitable comparison: Mage Armor does not conjure 'armor' it conjures a 'field of force' that surrounds the caster. And since the target of the Magic Vestment spell has to be 'armor or shield' obviously it can't target a 'field of force.'


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Expect table variation.

The description of the Ice Armor revelation (like Armor of Bones for the Bones mystery and Wood Armor for the Wood mystery) states that the armor is made of ice (or bones or wood) and not force. However, some will say that all of the protective revelations* must be treated the same even though some are described as physical substances (which would make them valid targets for magic vestment) and others aren't.

*- Spirit Shield for the Ancestor mystery, Cloak of Darkness for the Dark Tapestry mystery, Coat of Many Stars for the Heavens mystery, etc.


John Ruff wrote:
The question is of course: Does the 'armor' conjured by the Ice Armor count as a valid target for the Magic Vestment spell?

No, because it's not treated as armor for rule interactions. It doesn't have a light/medium/heavy classification, for example. If it was treated as armor, you could sunder it, but where are the statistics for hardness and HP? There're base values for ice, but they give HP based on thickness, which we don't have, either.


I have to agree with Derklord. If it has none of the drawbacks of a suit of armor or a shield it should not be counted as one.

Liberty's Edge

The description of Ice Armor lacks any information about the actual physical existence of the item. Targeting Magic Vestment requires an actual, physical object:
"Target armor or shield touched"

Normal clothing counts as armor for magical vestment, so it not having the drawback of armor or not having a light/medium/heavy classification isn't a solid (pun intended) argument, but its lack of a defined physical form is a compelling argument.

As too often happen, the writer assumed something but didn't communicate it. Probably a case of copy-paste without applying any further thought.

Dragonchess Player point about "all of the protective revelations" need to work the same way if compelling too.


Diego Rossi wrote:
Normal clothing counts as armor for magical vestment, so it not having the drawback of armor or not having a light/medium/heavy classification isn't a solid (pun intended) argument

That wasn't related to Magic Vestment. Ruling it as armor creates ultra weird situations because vital statistics are missing, and that makes it extremely unlikely to be the intend. Like, dipping into Rogue has you be fine wearing a 25lbs, -2 ACP, 20% ASF armor, but wearing the 0lbs, -0 ACP, 0% ASF 'Ice Armor' shuts down your Evasion, because it's not classified as "light armor or no armor".

I usually apply somethat similar to Occam's Razor in those situations: If you have two interpretations, one of which has everything nicely governed by rules and in line with other options, and the other has a ton of unclear or nonsensical interactions, or otherwise breaks the game, the first interpretation should always be considered the correct one. Even in case the second one is closer to the RAW.

Diego Rossi wrote:
As too often happen, the writer assumed something but didn't communicate it. Probably a case of copy-paste without applying any further thought.

Or a case of not seperating flavor-text from rule-text.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

You can argue it either way. Which is why I said "expect table variation."

Personally, I consider the description of the revelations as more than just "flavor-text;" if the description states the armor is made of a physical substance (ice, bone, wood), then it is so. As I mentioned, others will hold a different interpretation.

I don't believe there is a FAQ, so this falls in the "ask your GM" category.


You can argue it either way but you shouldn’t. If you start treating magical effects that grant an armor bonus to AC but which are not actual armor as per the rules(regardless of flavor text) as actual armor it causes big problems for a lot of character builds especially monks. For example Bracers of Armor “ These items appear to be wrist or arm guards, sometimes etched with symbols of protection or depictions of vigilant-looking animals. Bracers of armor surround the wearer with an invisible but tangible field of force, granting him an armor bonus of +1 to +8, just as though he were wearing armor. Both bracers of armor must be worn for the magic to be effective.” Historically bracers ARE a piece of armor worn on the wrists. as a magic item the provide an armor bonus “ just as though he were wearing armor”. Armor is even in the name of the item. Yet these are a go to item for most monks. An interpretation of these as armor however makes them useless to a monk as it negates many monk abilities. This issue has been debated heatedly before and the result is usually against anything other than actual armor being counted as armor for any effect relating to armor.


compare that ice armor (revolution) to this ice armor (spell).

the revolution doesn't give what kind of armor it is (light\heavy\medium), it's hp\ hardness and how it interact with water( it state that it get's better in cold areas and worse in hot, but unlike the spell it won't melt even if you dip into hot magma.)

all in all it seem more like a spell that make magical ice that act "as if " it's an armor then real armor made out of ice. ("Effect: a suit of armor made of ice")


https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43fan?Monk-AC-Ice-Armor

I think all the most salient arguments for and against this problem can be found on this thread. There really is no need to rehash this argument.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Waves Oracle Ice Armor and Magic Vestment All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.