The Bracers of Defence make the Mithral Shirt redundant:
Bracers: AC 13 + Dex no other modifiers, Rare Magic Item so 500gp-2,000gp Shirt: AC 13 + Dex no other modifiers, 5,000gp
And of course the Shirt is more hassle in terms of donning / removal.
I'd assume the Mithral Shirt baseline cost needs a signicant reduction.
The Bracers of Defence make the Mithral Shirt redundant:Bracers: AC 13 + Dex no other modifiers, Rare Magic Item so 500gp-2,000gpShirt: AC 13 + Dex no other modifiers, 5,000gpAnd of course the Shirt is more hassle in terms of donning / removal.I'd as
I would rather see rare+ items inreased tenfold in value. They are described as nearly unobtainable in the selling/buying section...why istheir value so low then.
I would rather see rare+ items inreased tenfold in value. They are described as nearly unobtainable in the selling/buying section...why istheir value so low then.
True, I think either comment beats the current listings, assuming mundane armour values are the baseline (if you can call anything made of Mithral to be mundane!) then equivalent magic trinkets should be "priceless" or at least much more expensive.
True, I think either comment beats the current listings, assuming mundane armour values are the baseline (if you can call anything made of Mithral to be mundane!) then equivalent magic trinkets should be "priceless" or at least much more expensive.
Am I missing something, or couldn't you wear both and get 16 + Dex?
I wish they'd return to the format of 10 + Armor + Dex, rather than this weird layout.
Am I missing something, or couldn't you wear both and get 16 + Dex?I wish they'd return to the format of 10 + Armor + Dex, rather than this weird layout.
Am I missing something, or couldn't you wear both and get 16 + Dex?
I wish they'd return to the format of 10 + Armor + Dex, rather than this weird layout.
No, they dont give you +3 armor
They set your armor to 13+Dex
Oh, then I see their purpose now. It's for characters with no armor proficiency. If you can wear a mithral shirt, you have no reason to use Bracers of Defense. Bracers should definitely be more expensive.
No, they dont give you +3 armorThey set your armor to 13+Dex[/quote]Oh, then I see their purpose now. It's for characters with no armor proficiency. If you can wear a mithral shirt, you have no reason to use Bracers of Defense. Bracers should definit
The Bracers of Defence make the Mithral Shirt redundant:
Bracers: AC 13 + Dex no other modifiers, Rare Magic Item so 500gp-2,000gp Shirt: AC 13 + Dex no other modifiers, 5,000gp
And of course the Shirt is more hassle in terms of donning / removal.
I'd assume the Mithral Shirt baseline cost needs a signicant reduction.
any class that has a bonus for not wearing armor benefits from bracers of armor monk: 13 + dex + wis barbarian: 13 + dex + con
Oooh thats not good, going to need to remove that
A Barbie with 20 Dex/Con with a Defender, Bracers, Prayer, and a Dusty Rose Ioun Stone would have 28 AC Dragons tend to only have +8 and the highest I saw was +10
any class that has a bonus for not wearing armor benefits from bracers of armormonk: 13 + dex + wis barbarian: 13 + dex + con [/quote]Oooh thats not good, going to need to remove that A Barbie with 20 Dex/Con with a Defender, Bracers, Prayer, and a
The Bracers of Defence make the Mithral Shirt redundant:
Bracers: AC 13 + Dex no other modifiers, Rare Magic Item so 500gp-2,000gp Shirt: AC 13 + Dex no other modifiers, 5,000gp
And of course the Shirt is more hassle in terms of donning / removal.
I'd assume the Mithral Shirt baseline cost needs a signicant reduction.
any class that has a bonus for not wearing armor benefits from bracers of armor monk: 13 + dex + wis barbarian: 13 + dex + con
Another reason to make it a +3 armor bonus on top of a base 10 instead of a base 13 armor class. It could count as armor for the purpose of Monks not getting to benefit from it, but still not require proficiency so a Wizard could use it.
any class that has a bonus for not wearing armor benefits from bracers of armormonk: 13 + dex + wis barbarian: 13 + dex + con [/quote]Another reason to make it a +3 armor bonus on top of a base 10 instead of a base 13 armor class. It could count as a
The Bracers of Defence make the Mithral Shirt redundant:
Bracers: AC 13 + Dex no other modifiers, Rare Magic Item so 500gp-2,000gp Shirt: AC 13 + Dex no other modifiers, 5,000gp
And of course the Shirt is more hassle in terms of donning / removal.
I'd assume the Mithral Shirt baseline cost needs a signicant reduction.
any class that has a bonus for not wearing armor benefits from bracers of armor monk: 13 + dex + wis barbarian: 13 + dex + con
Barb says " While you are not wearing any armor, your Armor Class equals 10 + your Dexterity modifier + your Constitution modifier." Bracers say "While wearing bracers of defense, your AC becomes 13 + your Dexterity modifier." It's pretty obvious to me that they're both specifically written in a way that says they don't stack, one would overwrite the other.
any class that has a bonus for not wearing armor benefits from bracers of armormonk: 13 + dex + wis barbarian: 13 + dex + con [/quote]Barb says " While you are not wearing any armor, your Armor Class equals 10 + your Dexterity modifier + your Constit
Barb says " While you are not wearing any armor, your Armor Class equals 10 + your Dexterity modifier + your Constitution modifier." Bracers say "While wearing bracers of defense, your AC becomes 13 + your Dexterity modifier." It's pretty obvious to me that they're both specifically written in a way that says they don't stack, one would overwrite the other.
It isn't the fact that they don't stack that makes this issue problematic. The problem here is that an unarmored barbarian wearing the bracers of defense has two different ACs. They aren't merely incompatible, they cause the rules of the game to break down.
It isn't the fact that they don't stack that makes this issue problematic. The problem here is that an unarmored barbarian wearing the bracers of defense has two different ACs. They aren't merely incompatible, they cause the rules of the game to brea
One of the things they really need to do with magic items in general is use keywords for the bonus types, to prevent excessive stacking. Bracers of Armor should give a +3 armor bonus, and things like a ring of protection should give a magic bonus. Right now, there's really no limit to what items you can stack. You could have a defender sword (+3 AC), a +3 shield, a ring of protection (+1), a dusty rose ioun stone (+1), etc. A barbarian with those items, for example, could potentially have an AC over 30!
One of the things they really need to do with magic items in general is use keywords for the bonus types, to prevent excessive stacking. Bracers of Armor should give a +3 armor bonus, and things like a ring of protection should give a magic bonus. Ri
The Bracers of Defence make the Mithral Shirt redundant:
Bracers: AC 13 + Dex no other modifiers, Rare Magic Item so 500gp-2,000gp Shirt: AC 13 + Dex no other modifiers, 5,000gp
And of course the Shirt is more hassle in terms of donning / removal.
I'd assume the Mithral Shirt baseline cost needs a signicant reduction.
any class that has a bonus for not wearing armor benefits from bracers of armor monk: 13 + dex + wis barbarian: 13 + dex + con
Barb says " While you are not wearing any armor, your Armor Class equals 10 + your Dexterity modifier + your Constitution modifier." Bracers say "While wearing bracers of defense, your AC becomes 13 + your Dexterity modifier." It's pretty obvious to me that they're both specifically written in a way that says they don't stack, one would overwrite the other.
One of the things they really need to do with magic items in general is use keywords for the bonus types, to prevent excessive stacking. Bracers of Armor should give a +3 armor bonus, and things like a ring of protection should give a magic bonus. Right now, there's really no limit to what items you can stack. You could have a defender sword (+3 AC), a +3 shield, a ring of protection (+1), a dusty rose ioun stone (+1), etc. A barbarian with those items, for example, could potentially have an AC over 30!
Ring of Protection specifically states that it doesnt work any other armor bonus from magic items
any class that has a bonus for not wearing armor benefits from bracers of armormonk: 13 + dex + wis barbarian: 13 + dex + con [/quote]Barb says " While you are not wearing any armor, your Armor Class equals 10 + your Dexterity modifier + your Constit
One of the things they really need to do with magic items in general is use keywords for the bonus types, to prevent excessive stacking. Bracers of Armor should give a +3 armor bonus, and things like a ring of protection should give a magic bonus. Right now, there's really no limit to what items you can stack. You could have a defender sword (+3 AC), a +3 shield, a ring of protection (+1), a dusty rose ioun stone (+1), etc. A barbarian with those items, for example, could potentially have an AC over 30!
Ring of Protection says it doesn't stack with other magic items. That sets a precedent of magic items not stacking. Sadly, it also sets the precedent that magic items can stack.
I feel like something should be done but I also recognize it's the DM's job to deal with magic items. Therefore, you can always give out a "slightly dustier than dusty rose ioun stone" that gives a +1 bonus to AC that doesn't stack with other magic items.
Ring of Protection says it doesn't stack with other magic items. That sets a precedent of magic items not stacking. Sadly, it also sets the precedent that magic items can stack.I feel like something should be done but I also recognize it's the DM's
Barb says " While you are not wearing any armor, your Armor Class equals 10 + your Dexterity modifier + your Constitution modifier." Bracers say "While wearing bracers of defense, your AC becomes 13 + your Dexterity modifier." It's pretty obvious to me that they're both specifically written in a way that says they don't stack, one would overwrite the other.
It isn't the fact that they don't stack that makes this issue problematic. The problem here is that an unarmored barbarian wearing the bracers of defense has two different ACs. They aren't merely incompatible, they cause the rules of the game to break down.
This is totally true. I don't think it's a huge issue, I would assume you just get the better one/let the player choose (which ends up the same thing), but yes, it should be explicit.
Bracers of defence do NOT give you "+3 to AC when unarmoured" and the Barb/Monk abilities do NOT "let you add your con mod to your AC when unarmoured", you're coming from the perspective of previous additions, and not reading the text correctly.
The bracers set your default, base, starting AC to 13+dex instead of 10 + dex, and let you add things which are bonuses on top of that (such as spells, or other magic items), the barb ability sets your default, base, starting AC to 10 + dex + con, and lets you add bonuses on top of that. Neither are in fact "bonuses" to AC in the traditional sense.
When you have access to both, they don't just not stack, as Ganymede425 said, according to the rules, you now have two seperate, incompatible ACs.
The result being Bracers of armour are purely for casters with no armour prof, or normally light armoured characters to wear instead of a mithral shirt, if nobody else wants it.
It isn't the fact that they don't stack that makes this issue problematic. The problem here is that an unarmored barbarian wearing the bracers of defense has two different ACs. They aren't merely incompatible, they cause the rules of the game to brea
The bracers set your default, base, starting AC to 13+dex instead of 10 + dex, and let you add things which are bonuses on top of that (such as spells, or other magic items), the barb ability sets your default, base, starting AC to 10 + dex + con, and lets you add bonuses on top of that. Neither are in fact "bonuses" to AC in the traditional sense.
When you have access to both, they don't just not stack, as Ganymede425 said, according to the rules, you now have two seperate, incompatible ACs.
The result being Bracers of armour are purely for casters with no armour prof, or normally light armoured characters to wear instead of a mithral shirt, if nobody else wants it.
Ugh, youre right, I even knew you were right. I posted the same idea earlier
I don't blame you, they're honestly a bit wierd. The obviously fit the same balance space as normal armour, and the Barb/Monk abilities, but for Wizards, but the designers don't want to say that, because they pulled back that veil in 4e, and got a lot of backlash, so they can't just say "bracers of defense work as armour".
Also, can you get extra AC out of a ring of protection if you're wearing bracers of armor? It looks like it should work to me, using the explaination I just gave, but I can see other GMs ruling otherwise really easily.
One of the things they really need to do with magic items in general is use keywords for the bonus types, to prevent excessive stacking. Bracers of Armor should give a +3 armor bonus, and things like a ring of protection should give a magic bonus. Right now, there's really no limit to what items you can stack. You could have a defender sword (+3 AC), a +3 shield, a ring of protection (+1), a dusty rose ioun stone (+1), etc. A barbarian with those items, for example, could potentially have an AC over 30!
Ring of Protection says it doesn't stack with other magic items. That sets a precedent of magic items not stacking. Sadly, it also sets the precedent that magic items can stack.
I feel like something should be done but I also recognize it's the DM's job to deal with magic items. Therefore, you can always give out a "slightly dustier than dusty rose ioun stone" that gives a +1 bonus to AC that doesn't stack with other magic items.
Sure, the buck stops with the GM, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't try to make the GM's job easier. I get the feeling they want magic items to not stack in general, in which case they should probably come out and say "in general magic items do not stack" and give some specific cases where they do.
Also, I'm not sure there are +3 shields. Shields aren't on the list of possible +1 armours, and the one shield example doesn't give a bonus to AC. Which means your 20 Dex/20 Con Barb can only get the ioun stone and the sword, for 24 AC, and considering you could be spending 3 points of that on attack instead (which will often be worth it) It's not really the end of the world.
But again, stuff like "Shields can/cannot get magic bonuses to AC" kind of needs to be spelt out.
lulz.I don't blame you, they're honestly a bit wierd. The obviously fit the same balance space as normal armour, and the Barb/Monk abilities, but for Wizards, but the designers don't want to say that, because they pulled back that veil in 4e, and got
Tho now I have become curious about if Shield bonuses stack and dual wielding Shields
They already acknowledge that Shield can be used as a 1d4 weapon, and the AC bonus from shield simply says +1 AC, I'm not really finding anything else that says you can't and with the current MDD being the majority of your damage, this doesn't seem like a bad idea for Fighters to do
Tho now I have become curious about if Shield bonuses stack and dual wielding ShieldsThey already acknowledge that Shield can be used as a 1d4 weapon, and the AC bonus from shield simply says +1 AC, I'm not really finding anything else that says you
Ring of Protection says it doesn't stack with other magic items. That sets a precedent of magic items not stacking. Sadly, it also sets the precedent that magic items can stack.
You're right, I forgot about the ring. The problem I have is that right now all magic items that grant bonuses to AC are assumed to stack with each other by default. An item has to specifically state that it doesn't stack (like the ring of protection). I think it should be the exact opposite. Items should be assumed to not stack with each other unless an item specifically says that it can. Having the potential for unlimited stacked items as part of the default rules is madness.
Bracers of defence do NOT give you "+3 to AC when unarmoured" and the Barb/Monk abilities do NOT "let you add your con mod to your AC when unarmoured", you're coming from the perspective of previous additions, and not reading the text correctly.
The bracers set your default, base, starting AC to 13+dex instead of 10 + dex, and let you add things which are bonuses on top of that (such as spells, or other magic items), the barb ability sets your default, base, starting AC to 10 + dex + con, and lets you add bonuses on top of that. Neither are in fact "bonuses" to AC in the traditional sense.
When you have access to both, they don't just not stack, as Ganymede425 said, according to the rules, you now have two seperate, incompatible ACs.
The result being Bracers of armour are purely for casters with no armour prof, or normally light armoured characters to wear instead of a mithral shirt, if nobody else wants it.
I am aware of how bracers (and other armor) work. I wasn't trying to suggest that people can wear bracers with other armor and that they'd stack. I think they should change them to give an armor bonus instead, so that it's more clear. It's the other items, like ioun stones, that can stack infinitely, and IMO shouldn't stack by default. Sorry that I didn't explain myself better.
You're right, I forgot about the ring. The problem I have is that right now all magic items that grant bonuses to AC are assumed to stack with each other by default. An item has to specifically state that it doesn't stack (like the ring of protection
