bracer bonuses: which book is right? [Archive] - Wizards Community

bracer bonuses: which book is right? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
SilentLucidity
06-08-07, 10:03 AM The DMG shows it as an armor bonus for bracers of armor, but in the back of the Magic Item Compendium it says they are enhancement bonuses, which make more sense. Which one is the correct one?
NeueRegel
06-08-07, 10:29 AM In every game I've ever been in, it's an Armor bonus, as per the DMG. The one question I've ever had, was how it counts versus a sword with brilliant energy. It's never been debated, since none of us has ever had a weapon of that type.

Neue
SilentLucidity
06-08-07, 10:31 AM yes, but would I be correct in assuming that was before the Magic Item Compendium came out and nobody ever really looked to see that the MIC shows soemthign different now? I mean, the whoel point of the book was to redo magic items the way they think they really should be, with regard to cost and effects. Couldn't changing ti from armor to enhancement bonus be one of those changes?
Kn1ves
06-08-07, 10:38 AM Well an armor bonus made sense because of the spell needed to make the bracers but the MIC was meant to update older magic items so I'd say it supersedes the DMG because it's newer. This is great news for my Sorcerer.
strenoth
06-08-07, 10:39 AM Bracers of armor provide an armor bonus. That's what they are intended to do, and shoudl do, as they are NOT intented to stack with worn armor.
strenoth
06-08-07, 10:40 AM Well an armor bonus made sense because of the spell needed to make the bracers but the MIC was meant to update older magic items so I'd say it supersedes the DMG because it's newer. This is great news for my Sorcerer.

unless a secondary source specifically states that this is an update to a previous rule, then the primary source continue to be right.

DMG is primary source of how magic items work.

They remain armor bonuses. MIC is a typo.
Wharin
06-08-07, 10:45 AM I believe the intent of Bracers of Armor being listed as an Enchantment bonus in the MIC was to illustrate/point out how the cost of said armor matches up pretty much perfectly with magical armor bonuses. Also, I think it would help reinforce any argument against someone wanting an set of "AC 8 Bracers +5". Making them cost much cheaper than they should be (as AC 13 Bracers would be epic)
Merestil Haye
06-08-07, 12:13 PM What page of the MIC calls the bonus from Bracers of Armour an enhancement bonus?

If we are referring to the table on pp 245-246, it is a table.

The DMG states in the item description that it gives an armour bonus. Unless there is text in the MIC that states it becomes an enhancement bonus to AC then I don't accept a line (or even eight lines) in a table as being sufficient authority to revise the DMG.

If there was explicit text in the body of the MIC then that would suffice.
SilentLucidity
06-08-07, 02:23 PM There are updates to a lot of objects in the MIC that reference the new cost and reiterate the 750 basic magic items as the book says it does. the point of the book is to revise cost and other things. Is there any way to contact an actual Wizards person to see what the deal is?
Vegepygmy
06-08-07, 02:51 PM The DMG shows it as an armor bonus for bracers of armor, but in the back of the Magic Item Compendium it says they are enhancement bonuses, which make more sense.Actually, that makes no sense at all. What would the bracers be enhancing? Themselves? The armor you're not wearing? :confused:
bondious
06-08-07, 02:55 PM Even if the Bracers of Armor have changed from granting an armor bonus to granting an enhancement bonus, it's not like you could have two enhancement bonuses working at the same time. So you'd either have a suit of armor with an enhancement bonus (ex: +3 Full Plate) OR a suit of armor AND a pair of bracers, which together would do the same thing. In this latter way, you would save 150gp of the masterwork price for armor, but would be taking up both the armor slot AND the bracer's slot, to achieve a function that could be done with just the armor slot.

My thought about this is that an enhancement bonus to armor would have to have a base armor bonus before it can "enhance" anything, and that Bracers of Armor have always been meant to be an armor bonus.
SilentLucidity
06-08-07, 02:55 PM Wel, if you're wearing no armor, it's definitely an enhancement to to what you don't have and if you are wearing armor, it is just additional protection. I mean, you see warriors in movies or on tv or what not bearing bracers along with their armor. why not in D&D?
SilentLucidity
06-08-07, 02:58 PM ok, so what you're saying(and I'm trying to get this right, not make an argument) is that you can have bracers of armor(if they counted as an enhancement bonus) of +8 and have normal armor(which would count as the "armor") and possibly have bracers of armor +8 and wear full plate, yes?(I'm playing a rogue so it's just hypothetical cuz I wouldn't do that myself) Our group is just having a discussion about this because we're all just wondering about it.
bondious
06-08-07, 03:19 PM ok, so what you're saying(and I'm trying to get this right, not make an argument) is that you can have bracers of armor(if they counted as an enhancement bonus) of +8 and have normal armor(which would count as the "armor") and possibly have bracers of armor +8 and wear full plate, yes?(I'm playing a rogue so it's just hypothetical cuz I wouldn't do that myself) Our group is just having a discussion about this because we're all just wondering about it.

I'm assuming this was asked towards me, so I'll answer.

Okay, first off, what I said above was using the assumption that Bracers of Armor grant an enhancement bonus to AC. Remembering that, all I was saying is that if you wore a non-enchanted suit of armor (leather, breatsplate, etc) and also wore a pair of Bracers of Armor, you could probably houserule that it functions the same as if you just had an enchanted suit of armor.

Example:

+3 Breastplate = +8 total armor bonus (+5 armor, +3 enhancement) and costs 9,350gp (200gp for armor, 150gp for masterwork, 9k for enhancement)

OR

Breastplate and Bracers of Armor +3 = +8 total armor bonus (+5 armor, +3 enhancement) and costs 200gp (armor) plus 9,000gp (bracers), for a total of 9,200gp.

Price-wise, it's not that different, and will always be that 150gp masterwork value for ANY armor/bracers combination you want...unless you want masterwork armor, then there'd be no price difference. The only thing is that you're using two different slots to do the same thing that one armor slot can do. And it's not going to stack if you had a suit of armor with an enhancement bonus AND Bracers of Armor, whether you see the bracers as an armor bonus OR an enhancement bonus.

Does that help?
SilentLucidity
06-08-07, 03:22 PM It helps out immensely. thanks alot.
Pyke_Moonshadow
06-08-07, 03:31 PM Fullplate +8 costs 641,650 gp. (as it would be epic)

Fullplate and Bracers of Armor +8 costs 65,500 gp. Hmmm well worth it I think.

I am also in the AC bonus and not enhancement bonus camp.
risner
06-08-07, 05:40 PM Ok, there is no such thing as an "enhancement bonus to AC" in the game or in the MiC.

Enhancement Bonuses add to the Amour Bonus of an existing item, but when applied to your AC they are simply Armour Bonuses.

I'd like to see this alleged page in the MiC thats makes you think Bracers of Amour provide an Enhancement Bonus to your AC.
SilentLucidity
06-08-07, 05:44 PM Page 247 of the Magic Item Compendium, smart@ss.
Muktar
06-08-07, 07:53 PM Page 247 of the Magic Item Compendium, smart@ss.

Never follow a quicklist table. The one on pg 234 states that it is an armor bonus and the magic item itself refers to the DMG. DMG trumps MiC in the first place, because a full item desc trumps a table. Those quicklist tables are notorious to be incredibly wrong.
risner
06-09-07, 12:44 AM Page 247 of the Magic Item Compendium, smart@ss.

Nice attitude.

What I think is hilarious, is there isn't anything to support your position on page 247.
SilentLucidity
06-09-07, 01:24 AM What I think is hilarious is that you obviously aren't even reading it. Yes, Muktar is right in that it is a quicktable, but the original question I had is right there in the Bracers +2 description on that table. It says enhancement bonus and I was hoping that someone at Wizards could say "Yes, it's a typo/misprint and refer to the DMG" or say no, and give a better clarification. Seems everyone else on this thread sees where it says exactly what I'm saying and you're the only one who doesn't.
cwslyclgh
06-09-07, 01:37 AM I was hoping that someone at Wizards could say "Yes, it's a typo/misprint and refer to the DMG" or say no, and give a better clarification.this will never happen, and the reason it will never happen is because of this:

Errata Rule: Primary Sources
When you find a disagreement between two D&D rules
sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the
primary source is correct. One example of a
primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a
table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence
when the short description in the beginning of the spells
chapter disagrees.
Another example of primary vs. secondary sources involves
book and topic precedence. The Player’s Handbook, for
example, gives all the rules for playing the game, for PC
races, and the base class descriptions. If you find something
on one of those topics from the Dungeon Master’s Guide or
the Monster Manual that disagrees with the Player’s
Handbook, you should assume the Player’s Handbook is the
primary source. The Dungeon Master’s Guide is the primary
source for topics such as magic item descriptions, special
material construction rules, and so on. The Monster Manual
is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and
supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities.

WotC said the proceeding so that they didn't have to say "yes this is a misprint" every time they made one in a suplement.

In short it doesn't matter at all what a table in the MIC says, unless WotC releases a direct statement saying that it is an official change.
cwslyclgh
06-09-07, 01:40 AM What I think is hilarious is that you obviously aren't even reading it.actually he is correct, bracers of armor do not appear at all on the table on page 247... the table you are refering to (where bracers of armor are erroneously listed as giving an "enhancement bonus to AC") is on page 246.
Muktar
06-09-07, 02:15 AM What I think is hilarious is that you obviously aren't even reading it. Yes, Muktar is right in that it is a quicktable, but the original question I had is right there in the Bracers +2 description on that table. It says enhancement bonus and I was hoping that someone at Wizards could say "Yes, it's a typo/misprint and refer to the DMG" or say no, and give a better clarification. Seems everyone else on this thread sees where it says exactly what I'm saying and you're the only one who doesn't.

What I find funny is that I said the shortened version of the WoTC ruling that cwslyclgh so kindly reprinted. You could of said, "Where did you get that?" You will most likely get a more polite answer.
NobodyRemembersThis
06-09-07, 04:00 AM Well an armor bonus made sense because of the spell needed to make the bracers but the MIC was meant to update older magic items so I'd say it supersedes the DMG because it's newer. This is great news for my Sorcerer.Please add an IMC to this statement. Since the only books everyone uses are the CORE 3, those books (plus their errata) always supercede any other source when you are discussing the rules.

If you rule it an enhancement bonus, it violates the rules as presented in the DMG (AC has a pre-epic enhancement limit of +5). So, it is still an armor bonus.

Oh, and On Brilliant Energy.
A brilliant energy weapon ignores nonliving matter. Armor and shield bonuses to AC (including any enhancement bonuses to that armor) do not count against it because the weapon passes through armor. (Dexterity, deflection, dodge, natural armor, and other such bonuses still apply.)By RAW, it still doesn't protect you - an enhancement to AC or an Armor bonus, even a force effect, are bypassed by brilliant energy weapons.
bondious
06-09-07, 04:02 AM Fullplate +8 costs 641,650 gp. (as it would be epic)

Fullplate and Bracers of Armor +8 costs 65,500 gp. Hmmm well worth it I think.

I am also in the AC bonus and not enhancement bonus camp.

Hmmmm...yeah, that WOULD be a little TOO GOOD, huh? I didn't think about the epic enhancement rules.

Oh well, guess that was a dumb compromise on my part. :rolleyes:

...snd I'm in the "armor bonus" camp as well, for the record. ;)
risner
06-09-07, 08:28 AM What I think is hilarious is that you obviously aren't even reading it.

Oh I read it, but with your supreme attitude, I decided to reject the page number and make you give me the correct page number since the one you gave me absolutely 100% without a doubt in the universe is wrong.

Also, are you unaware of the rules on D&D? Are you unaware that a chart is the lowest priority for rules adjudication? Meaning a text block (say like the one in the DMG pointed out by the MiC) is higher priority than any chart in any book? So your whole point of using that chart to re-invent the DMG version is unsubstantiated in the rules. They rules are clear, that if the chart differs from the text (DMG version) then the DMG version is the correct interpretation.

Edit: so someone else beat me to spelling out in writing the rules for text vs charts.
SilentLucidity
06-09-07, 10:20 AM Well, I apologize. I'm not a rules lawyer so I don't read EVERYTHING that comes out, which is why I started this thread to begin with. Mr C Wesley Clough, where did you find that Errata thing so I can find it also and show my guys? And my god, it was 1 page off. Close enough. It's not like it couldn't be found easily enough.
DewnErly
06-09-07, 10:41 AM The answer seems simple to me, enhancement bonuses are always applied to something, enhancement bonus to strength, enhancement bonus to your sheilds ac, i think the MIC is just pointing out that the +whatever bonus on the bracers is specificaly an enhancement bonus to the 0 ac of the bracers themselves.
NobodyRemembersThis
06-09-07, 12:49 PM Well, I apologize. I'm not a rules lawyer so I don't read EVERYTHING that comes out, which is why I started this thread to begin with. Mr C Wesley Clough, where did you find that Errata thing so I can find it also and show my guys? And my god, it was 1 page off. Close enough. It's not like it couldn't be found easily enough.See it >here< (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/DMG_Errata032004.zip) In the DMG 3.5 errata. :)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
SilentLucidity 06-08-07, 10:03 AM	The DMG shows it as an armor bonus for bracers of armor, but in the back of the Magic Item Compendium it says they are enhancement bonuses, which make more sense. Which one is the correct one?
NeueRegel 06-08-07, 10:29 AM	In every game I've ever been in, it's an Armor bonus, as per the DMG. The one question I've ever had, was how it counts versus a sword with brilliant energy. It's never been debated, since none of us has ever had a weapon of that type. Neue
SilentLucidity 06-08-07, 10:31 AM	yes, but would I be correct in assuming that was before the Magic Item Compendium came out and nobody ever really looked to see that the MIC shows soemthign different now? I mean, the whoel point of the book was to redo magic items the way they think they really should be, with regard to cost and effects. Couldn't changing ti from armor to enhancement bonus be one of those changes?
Kn1ves 06-08-07, 10:38 AM	Well an armor bonus made sense because of the spell needed to make the bracers but the MIC was meant to update older magic items so I'd say it supersedes the DMG because it's newer. This is great news for my Sorcerer.
strenoth 06-08-07, 10:39 AM	Bracers of armor provide an armor bonus. That's what they are intended to do, and shoudl do, as they are NOT intented to stack with worn armor.
strenoth 06-08-07, 10:40 AM	Well an armor bonus made sense because of the spell needed to make the bracers but the MIC was meant to update older magic items so I'd say it supersedes the DMG because it's newer. This is great news for my Sorcerer. unless a secondary source specifically states that this is an update to a previous rule, then the primary source continue to be right. DMG is primary source of how magic items work. They remain armor bonuses. MIC is a typo.
Wharin 06-08-07, 10:45 AM	I believe the intent of Bracers of Armor being listed as an Enchantment bonus in the MIC was to illustrate/point out how the cost of said armor matches up pretty much perfectly with magical armor bonuses. Also, I think it would help reinforce any argument against someone wanting an set of "AC 8 Bracers +5". Making them cost much cheaper than they should be (as AC 13 Bracers would be epic)
Merestil Haye 06-08-07, 12:13 PM	What page of the MIC calls the bonus from Bracers of Armour an enhancement bonus? If we are referring to the table on pp 245-246, it is a table. The DMG states in the item description that it gives an armour bonus. Unless there is text in the MIC that states it becomes an enhancement bonus to AC then I don't accept a line (or even eight lines) in a table as being sufficient authority to revise the DMG. If there was explicit text in the body of the MIC then that would suffice.
SilentLucidity 06-08-07, 02:23 PM	There are updates to a lot of objects in the MIC that reference the new cost and reiterate the 750 basic magic items as the book says it does. the point of the book is to revise cost and other things. Is there any way to contact an actual Wizards person to see what the deal is?
Vegepygmy 06-08-07, 02:51 PM	The DMG shows it as an armor bonus for bracers of armor, but in the back of the Magic Item Compendium it says they are enhancement bonuses, which make more sense.Actually, that makes no sense at all. What would the bracers be enhancing? Themselves? The armor you're not wearing? :confused:
bondious 06-08-07, 02:55 PM	Even if the Bracers of Armor have changed from granting an armor bonus to granting an enhancement bonus, it's not like you could have two enhancement bonuses working at the same time. So you'd either have a suit of armor with an enhancement bonus (ex: +3 Full Plate) OR a suit of armor AND a pair of bracers, which together would do the same thing. In this latter way, you would save 150gp of the masterwork price for armor, but would be taking up both the armor slot AND the bracer's slot, to achieve a function that could be done with just the armor slot. My thought about this is that an enhancement bonus to armor would have to have a base armor bonus before it can "enhance" anything, and that Bracers of Armor have always been meant to be an armor bonus.
SilentLucidity 06-08-07, 02:55 PM	Wel, if you're wearing no armor, it's definitely an enhancement to to what you don't have and if you are wearing armor, it is just additional protection. I mean, you see warriors in movies or on tv or what not bearing bracers along with their armor. why not in D&D?
SilentLucidity 06-08-07, 02:58 PM	ok, so what you're saying(and I'm trying to get this right, not make an argument) is that you can have bracers of armor(if they counted as an enhancement bonus) of +8 and have normal armor(which would count as the "armor") and possibly have bracers of armor +8 and wear full plate, yes?(I'm playing a rogue so it's just hypothetical cuz I wouldn't do that myself) Our group is just having a discussion about this because we're all just wondering about it.
bondious 06-08-07, 03:19 PM	ok, so what you're saying(and I'm trying to get this right, not make an argument) is that you can have bracers of armor(if they counted as an enhancement bonus) of +8 and have normal armor(which would count as the "armor") and possibly have bracers of armor +8 and wear full plate, yes?(I'm playing a rogue so it's just hypothetical cuz I wouldn't do that myself) Our group is just having a discussion about this because we're all just wondering about it. I'm assuming this was asked towards me, so I'll answer. Okay, first off, what I said above was using the assumption that Bracers of Armor grant an enhancement bonus to AC. Remembering that, all I was saying is that if you wore a non-enchanted suit of armor (leather, breatsplate, etc) and also wore a pair of Bracers of Armor, you could probably houserule that it functions the same as if you just had an enchanted suit of armor. Example: +3 Breastplate = +8 total armor bonus (+5 armor, +3 enhancement) and costs 9,350gp (200gp for armor, 150gp for masterwork, 9k for enhancement) OR Breastplate and Bracers of Armor +3 = +8 total armor bonus (+5 armor, +3 enhancement) and costs 200gp (armor) plus 9,000gp (bracers), for a total of 9,200gp. Price-wise, it's not that different, and will always be that 150gp masterwork value for ANY armor/bracers combination you want...unless you want masterwork armor, then there'd be no price difference. The only thing is that you're using two different slots to do the same thing that one armor slot can do. And it's not going to stack if you had a suit of armor with an enhancement bonus AND Bracers of Armor, whether you see the bracers as an armor bonus OR an enhancement bonus. Does that help?
SilentLucidity 06-08-07, 03:22 PM	It helps out immensely. thanks alot.
Pyke_Moonshadow 06-08-07, 03:31 PM	Fullplate +8 costs 641,650 gp. (as it would be epic) Fullplate and Bracers of Armor +8 costs 65,500 gp. Hmmm well worth it I think. I am also in the AC bonus and not enhancement bonus camp.
risner 06-08-07, 05:40 PM	Ok, there is no such thing as an "enhancement bonus to AC" in the game or in the MiC. Enhancement Bonuses add to the Amour Bonus of an existing item, but when applied to your AC they are simply Armour Bonuses. I'd like to see this alleged page in the MiC thats makes you think Bracers of Amour provide an Enhancement Bonus to your AC.
SilentLucidity 06-08-07, 05:44 PM	Page 247 of the Magic Item Compendium, smart@ss.
Muktar 06-08-07, 07:53 PM	Page 247 of the Magic Item Compendium, smart@ss. Never follow a quicklist table. The one on pg 234 states that it is an armor bonus and the magic item itself refers to the DMG. DMG trumps MiC in the first place, because a full item desc trumps a table. Those quicklist tables are notorious to be incredibly wrong.
risner 06-09-07, 12:44 AM	Page 247 of the Magic Item Compendium, smart@ss. Nice attitude. What I think is hilarious, is there isn't anything to support your position on page 247.
SilentLucidity 06-09-07, 01:24 AM	What I think is hilarious is that you obviously aren't even reading it. Yes, Muktar is right in that it is a quicktable, but the original question I had is right there in the Bracers +2 description on that table. It says enhancement bonus and I was hoping that someone at Wizards could say "Yes, it's a typo/misprint and refer to the DMG" or say no, and give a better clarification. Seems everyone else on this thread sees where it says exactly what I'm saying and you're the only one who doesn't.
cwslyclgh 06-09-07, 01:37 AM	I was hoping that someone at Wizards could say "Yes, it's a typo/misprint and refer to the DMG" or say no, and give a better clarification.this will never happen, and the reason it will never happen is because of this: Errata Rule: Primary Sources When you find a disagreement between two D&D rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence when the short description in the beginning of the spells chapter disagrees. Another example of primary vs. secondary sources involves book and topic precedence. The Player’s Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing the game, for PC races, and the base class descriptions. If you find something on one of those topics from the Dungeon Master’s Guide or the Monster Manual that disagrees with the Player’s Handbook, you should assume the Player’s Handbook is the primary source. The Dungeon Master’s Guide is the primary source for topics such as magic item descriptions, special material construction rules, and so on. The Monster Manual is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities. WotC said the proceeding so that they didn't have to say "yes this is a misprint" every time they made one in a suplement. In short it doesn't matter at all what a table in the MIC says, unless WotC releases a direct statement saying that it is an official change.
cwslyclgh 06-09-07, 01:40 AM	What I think is hilarious is that you obviously aren't even reading it.actually he is correct, bracers of armor do not appear at all on the table on page 247... the table you are refering to (where bracers of armor are erroneously listed as giving an "enhancement bonus to AC") is on page 246.
Muktar 06-09-07, 02:15 AM	What I think is hilarious is that you obviously aren't even reading it. Yes, Muktar is right in that it is a quicktable, but the original question I had is right there in the Bracers +2 description on that table. It says enhancement bonus and I was hoping that someone at Wizards could say "Yes, it's a typo/misprint and refer to the DMG" or say no, and give a better clarification. Seems everyone else on this thread sees where it says exactly what I'm saying and you're the only one who doesn't. What I find funny is that I said the shortened version of the WoTC ruling that cwslyclgh so kindly reprinted. You could of said, "Where did you get that?" You will most likely get a more polite answer.
NobodyRemembersThis 06-09-07, 04:00 AM	Well an armor bonus made sense because of the spell needed to make the bracers but the MIC was meant to update older magic items so I'd say it supersedes the DMG because it's newer. This is great news for my Sorcerer.Please add an IMC to this statement. Since the only books everyone uses are the CORE 3, those books (plus their errata) always supercede any other source when you are discussing the rules. If you rule it an enhancement bonus, it violates the rules as presented in the DMG (AC has a pre-epic enhancement limit of +5). So, it is still an armor bonus. Oh, and On Brilliant Energy. A brilliant energy weapon ignores nonliving matter. Armor and shield bonuses to AC (including any enhancement bonuses to that armor) do not count against it because the weapon passes through armor. (Dexterity, deflection, dodge, natural armor, and other such bonuses still apply.)By RAW, it still doesn't protect you - an enhancement to AC or an Armor bonus, even a force effect, are bypassed by brilliant energy weapons.
bondious 06-09-07, 04:02 AM	Fullplate +8 costs 641,650 gp. (as it would be epic) Fullplate and Bracers of Armor +8 costs 65,500 gp. Hmmm well worth it I think. I am also in the AC bonus and not enhancement bonus camp. Hmmmm...yeah, that WOULD be a little TOO GOOD, huh? I didn't think about the epic enhancement rules. Oh well, guess that was a dumb compromise on my part. :rolleyes: ...snd I'm in the "armor bonus" camp as well, for the record. ;)
risner 06-09-07, 08:28 AM	What I think is hilarious is that you obviously aren't even reading it. Oh I read it, but with your supreme attitude, I decided to reject the page number and make you give me the correct page number since the one you gave me absolutely 100% without a doubt in the universe is wrong. Also, are you unaware of the rules on D&D? Are you unaware that a chart is the lowest priority for rules adjudication? Meaning a text block (say like the one in the DMG pointed out by the MiC) is higher priority than any chart in any book? So your whole point of using that chart to re-invent the DMG version is unsubstantiated in the rules. They rules are clear, that if the chart differs from the text (DMG version) then the DMG version is the correct interpretation. Edit: so someone else beat me to spelling out in writing the rules for text vs charts.
SilentLucidity 06-09-07, 10:20 AM	Well, I apologize. I'm not a rules lawyer so I don't read EVERYTHING that comes out, which is why I started this thread to begin with. Mr C Wesley Clough, where did you find that Errata thing so I can find it also and show my guys? And my god, it was 1 page off. Close enough. It's not like it couldn't be found easily enough.
DewnErly 06-09-07, 10:41 AM	The answer seems simple to me, enhancement bonuses are always applied to something, enhancement bonus to strength, enhancement bonus to your sheilds ac, i think the MIC is just pointing out that the +whatever bonus on the bracers is specificaly an enhancement bonus to the 0 ac of the bracers themselves.
NobodyRemembersThis 06-09-07, 12:49 PM	Well, I apologize. I'm not a rules lawyer so I don't read EVERYTHING that comes out, which is why I started this thread to begin with. Mr C Wesley Clough, where did you find that Errata thing so I can find it also and show my guys? And my god, it was 1 page off. Close enough. It's not like it couldn't be found easily enough.See it >here< (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/DMG_Errata032004.zip) In the DMG 3.5 errata. :)