Bracers of Armour - Why bother? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Bracers of Armour - Why bother? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Judo on the rocks
02-09-05, 08:35 PM I was just working on equipment im going to buy for my Mage and was thinking of geting Bracers of Armour +1 or +2 which ever i could afford but then i saw the buckler and said to myself "a +1 buckler does just the same thing with only 5% spell failure and much cheaper." Well i didn't really like the idea of even 5% spell failure so i forgot about the buckler for a while untill i was reading about Mithril and its properties and i said "this is just what i need." So instead of Bracers of Armour +2 worth 4000gp im thinking of buying a mithril buckler +1 2015gp. Does anyone see any problems with this method?
Wolf72
02-09-05, 09:26 PM if both are available I don't see a real problem with it ... up to the DM and what s/he says is available.
Nephlite
02-09-05, 09:39 PM I was just working on equipment im going to buy for my Mage and was thinking of geting Bracers of Armour +1 or +2 which ever i could afford but then i saw the buckler and said to myself "a +1 buckler does just the same thing with only 5% spell failure and much cheaper." Well i didn't really like the idea of even 5% spell failure so i forgot about the buckler for a while untill i was reading about Mithril and its properties and i said "this is just what i need." So instead of Bracers of Armour +2 worth 4000gp im thinking of buying a mithril buckler +1 2015gp. Does anyone see any problems with this method?

Why don't you try getting both: Armor and shield bonuses stack so you should be able to get both.
Nom
02-09-05, 10:30 PM As a general rule, I'm not a big fan of bracers below +4. Mage armour lasts 1 hour / level and it's only a level 1 spell. Admittedly, it's also dispellable.

But yes, an enhanced mithral buckler is good value, is significantly cheaper than bracers, and stacks with mage armour. Bracers are primarily useful for monks or if you want an armour bonus greater than +4.
SD
02-10-05, 12:09 AM It always surprises me how many people find any measure of arcane spell failure unacceptable. If you're really bent on the cheaper armors, a +1 heavy mithral shield is barely more expensive than a buckler and gives +3 shield to AC for only 5% failure and mithral chain is cheaper for a +4 armor bonus at 10% failure. If you really have that hard of a time trying not to roll 1s and 2s on a d20, go right ahead and take the mithril buckler since not even the lack of proficiency will harm you, but I don't see how theoretically losing 10% of your spells is more important than theoretically upping your opponent's odds of missing you in melee by 20%.

SD Edit: Granted, this doesn't hold all the way up -- full plate and all associated penalties just isn't worth it for a wizard unless there's a plan going. But I feel 10% is a negligible amount.
allenchan
02-10-05, 12:11 AM Are we talking just for magic users here, or in general? With a lot of charactesr I play I use bracers of armor because their max dex would otherwise by hampered by even the most unrestrictive armors and eliminates armor check penalties altogether
spyderfreek
02-10-05, 01:11 AM [QUOTE=SD]It always surprises me how many people find any measure of arcane spell failure unacceptable. If you're really bent on the cheaper armors, a +1 heavy mithral shield is barely more expensive than a buckler and gives +3 shield to AC for only 5% failure and mithral chain is cheaper for a +4 armor bonus at 10% failure.

Granted Mithril is not that expensive, but it also depends on how you play. In our world Mithril is fairly uncommon and usually only found with good dwarven or elven smithies who are loath to part with it not non-types.
Rulebook
02-10-05, 01:11 AM and why bother?

youve never gone up against a lot of incorporeal opponents have you? its fun watching the +5 adamantine full plate / +5 Mithral Shield with +5 defending spikes on it go up against a wraith, and get slapped around, completely bypassing his armor, leaving him essentially AC 11.

Bracers of armor are a force effect, so incorporeal creatures cant strike through it like normal armor. its wonderful.

and also, when you manage to get a dex higher than 28 or so (from whatever means) even padded armor cant keep up with your dex bonus (+9 and up) but bracers dont have dex bonuses, so its all good.

+6 Bracers, +5 ring, +5 large mithral shield is some nice AC, with no max dex.

think about that, huh?
Judo on the rocks
02-10-05, 01:28 AM [QUOTE=SD]a +1 heavy mithral shield is barely more expensive than a buckler and gives +3 shield to AC for only 5% failure and mithral chain is cheaper for a +4 armor bonus at 10% failure.
.

I wouldn't use the shield because it means i don't have a free hand to cast spells with, unless i don't hold a sword. Also does anyone know of a feat that removes spell failure? eg Like if you take this feat you can ignore 10% of spell failure chance, so i can use that mithril chain shirt without spell failure.
Thanks
colm_l
02-10-05, 04:00 AM It always surprises me how many people find any measure of arcane spell failure unacceptable.

It's a seriously obnoxious mechanic.

Not only does it slow play but also robs a wizard of most of his versatility at low levels (not as bad for combat spells but when you have 2/3 3rd level spells you can't really prepare two fly just in case).
EvilVegan
02-10-05, 04:02 AM Battle caster (feat) does that, but you need to be able to ignore some of it already, perhaps by taking Spell Sword or something.
DM Zoc
02-10-05, 05:41 AM Actually, battle caster only lets you wear heavier armor without any spell failure; you still need the ability to wear some level of armor without ASF, and it does nothing to deal with percent reductions.

Bracers of Armor gets most of its use from monks, who can use this to achieve a very worthwhile AC and who can't use shields regardless.
Evil Wizard
02-10-05, 10:05 AM A lot of people consider spell failure an unacceptable risk because wizards live and die by their spell selection. If a fighter misses in combat, he's got plenty more sword swings in him, and he has lots of hit points and armor to depend on. The wizard has his limited daily selection of spells. That's it. If you absolutely have to squeeze off a dimension door to save your life, do you really want to have to worry about a 10% chance of botching the spell? A rogue can just keep fiddling with a lock until he gets it open, but a mage only gets one shot at Bull's Strength.

That said, some people don't mind living a little on the edge. A 5% chance of failure is a 1 on a d20. People who routinely roll average results shouldn't suffer too much from wearing a buckler. People like me who routinely roll 1s care a little more. But most people are bothered by any chance of failure since you can't take 10 on spell rolls.

The mithril buckler is a brilliant idea, though. That's a potential +6 to a wizard's AC right there, and you can load it up with special abilities, too.
Joe Khol
02-10-05, 12:33 PM So instead of Bracers of Armour +2 worth 4000gp im thinking of buying a mithril buckler +1 2015gp. Does anyone see any problems with this method?

The only problem I can see is that you loose the bonus for the buckler when you're flat-footed or when you use the hand it's attached to (an issue if you use a bow or crossbow).
pres_man
02-10-05, 12:46 PM To avoid spell failure with armor, try using scrolls and wands.
Chazmon
02-10-05, 12:59 PM heres an idea i love the idea for the mithril shield but when you cast a spell why not put it down? when you cast a spell you normally back off and cast why not drop it?
all the benifits of the shield in combat none of the penalties
the same goes for swimming who realisticly goes swimming carrying a shield?
Draco Strang
02-10-05, 03:09 PM heres an idea i love the idea for the mithril shield but when you cast a spell why not put it down? when you cast a spell you normally back off and cast why not drop it?
all the benifits of the shield in combat none of the penalties
the same goes for swimming who realisticly goes swimming carrying a shield?
Thing is, you don't carry a shield so much as you wear it. Anything you carry has a handgrip and a loop for your arm. The good ones have loops that you can tighten up, and extra cordage to wrap you hand up in, so even if your grip goes slack, you can still maintain an effective hold on it.

That's the thing about taking it off. It's a standard action I believe, to get out of one and throw it on the ground.
SD
02-10-05, 03:13 PM heres an idea i love the idea for the mithril shield but when you cast a spell why not put it down? when you cast a spell you normally back off and cast why not drop it?
all the benifits of the shield in combat none of the penaltiesIf by "all the benefits" you mean "only one benefit at a time, since when you drop the shield you no longer have the AC from the shield and are more likely to get plugged in the face with an arrow or ten", then yes.

You're either using a shield or not. When you're using the shield, you get all relevant bonuses and penalties; when you're not, you don't. There is no middle ground.
Wharin
02-10-05, 03:24 PM youve never gone up against a lot of incorporeal opponents have you? its fun watching the +5 adamantine full plate / +5 Mithral Shield with +5 defending spikes on it go up against a wraith, and get slapped around, completely bypassing his armor, leaving him essentially AC 11.

Wait, you can do that? Not to go derail this topic, but that actually works? OMG, i think my head just exploded. Wow. Now do the spikes need to be on the shield, or can they be on the full plate? (Seriously, there is absolutely no sarcasm meant in this post, i just *never* thought of doing that)
kjenks
02-10-05, 03:25 PM To avoid spell failure with armor, try using scrolls and wands.

Wands are fine, but in 3.5e, arcane scrolls have arcane spell failure. Yes, that means the Magic Domain ain't what it used to be.

Oh, and Rulebook, Defending would work, so your buddy would be AC 16.
Rulebook
02-10-05, 04:25 PM yes, you can do the +5 defending spikes (but its tricky with the rules to keep it moving if you guys are real rules lawers, but im guessing since you didnt already know about this, you guys arent. go wild dude!)

you have to enchant armor/shield spikes seperately from whatever they're attached to, as well as pay seperate masterwork costs and everything. but otherwise they're treated as light weapons for all intents and purposes, so you can put any enchantment you could put on a light piercing weapon on them.
Von Helmet
02-10-05, 04:38 PM Oh, and Rulebook, Defending would work, so your buddy would be AC 16.
He left out the 10 everyone gets on the character sheet. It would actually be a 26 AC. 10 + 6 Bracers, + 5 ring, + 5 large mithral shield = 26
Twylyght
02-10-05, 04:45 PM yes +5 shield with +5 spikes of defending would work. It would need to be at least a light shield, but yes iut would work.

question though is is it worth the price at that point.

+5 light shield: 25,159
+5 spikes of defending(+6 weapon): 72,310
total cost: 97,469 total ac bonus +11 and of almost no use against touch and incorporeal creatures, or while flat footed

however for 96,000.

+8 bracers of armor: 64,000
+4 ring of protection: 32,000

+12 to ac, and usefull againt incorporeal, touch attacks, and while flat footed.

If your playing in a game where you could afford to get all 4, then do it by all means :), just in my opinion, start with force or deflection items that are always protecting, then add to that. though thats all just my 2 coppers.
tarkin
02-10-05, 05:01 PM 1) IIRC, Mithril can not totally eliminate Arcane Spell Failure chance, which I think the first poster was not aware of. The minimum a Mithral Buckler gets is 5% Spell Failure Chance. This was confirmed in a Sage ruling. You need a Prestige Class to eliminate that 5%.

2) Arcane Spell Failure only applies to spells with Somatic Components. You can Teleport freely, and use any spell that has had the Still spell feat applied without worrying about ASF.

3) To get Defending bonuses, you must be making an attack with the weapon. This means that you can not cast a spell while benefiting from Defending weapons, unless you are a Choker and have an extra Standard Action a round. Few spell casters consider a Defending weapon worth it.

As always, your DM is of course allowed to ignore the rules and do what he wants, forcing you to play in a super-munchkin game.
Nom
02-10-05, 05:06 PM If you absolutely have to squeeze off a dimension door to save your life, do you really want to have to worry about a 10% chance of botching the spell?Being picky: dimension door is one of the few spells that is V only, so ASF doesn't apply. :)
Wharin
02-10-05, 06:08 PM yes, you can do the +5 defending spikes (but its tricky with the rules to keep it moving if you guys are real rules lawers, but im guessing since you didnt already know about this, you guys arent. go wild dude!)

you have to enchant armor/shield spikes seperately from whatever they're attached to, as well as pay seperate masterwork costs and everything. but otherwise they're treated as light weapons for all intents and purposes, so you can put any enchantment you could put on a light piercing weapon on them.

Well among my friends i am the rules lawyer... Noone just ever tried this combo. And i don't have the DMG, because I know myself and i dont want to metagame, and it is just easier if i stay out of the DMG and MM, but anyway, here are my questions:

Does it matter where the spikes are? Can it be the spike on a spike shield? Can they be armour spikes? Probably either, right?

Do you need to attack with them to activate the defending ability? Something tells me you do. Which means if you do, unless you want to take a huge penalty to attacks, you need two weapon fighting to gain the benefit of the defending.

What kind of bonus does Defending give? Would it stack with another defending weapon?
Wolf72
02-10-05, 06:27 PM 1) IIRC, Mithril can not totally eliminate Arcane Spell Failure chance, which I think the first poster was not aware of. The minimum a Mithral Buckler gets is 5% Spell Failure Chance. This was confirmed in a Sage ruling. You need a Prestige Class to eliminate that 5%.

you wouldn't be able to cite that would you? I'd like to see that post/article/(whatever) ...

there is nothing written in the rules that says all armors/shields have a minimum ASF.

[edit] ... if there were, they could have easily written in "armor made of mithral reduces ASF by 10%, but never below 5%" (or something to that effect)
Vintus
02-10-05, 06:28 PM A spell failure of 5% or 10% isn't that much, unless you've seen someone
with a run a bad luck try to cast 4 spells and have each one burned due to the spell failure. If you can afford it, a +1 Mithral Chain Shirt of Twilight(Book of Exalted Deeds) will run you 5100gp and gives you an AC5 and NO spell failure.
Edymnion
02-10-05, 07:06 PM Mithril Shirt and a Mithril Buckler is that +5 base AC, with only 10% ASF for a little over 2,000 gp. Which you can then enchant up.

The mithril shirt gives you a max AC +9, compared to the max AC +8 of the bracers, and its cheaper to boot.
Illithid Tentacles
02-10-05, 07:45 PM It always surprises me how many people find any measure of arcane spell failure unacceptable.

Because it's likely to come back and kick you right in the nuts when you absolutely need to cast a spell to save your ass, and you really can't afford to lose a round because your spell failed. A 5% ASF means that, on average, 1 in 20 of the spells you cast that have somatic components will fail. Plus there's the fact that you have to look up whether the spell you're casting even has a somatic component, and if it does then you have to make an extra dice roll. It may not seem like much, but the extra time can really add up.
Ironwulf
02-10-05, 08:11 PM Hi. any reason you couldn't use the feat Still Spell. No somatic component = no ASF, and it only bumps up the spell level by one.
Giver_of_Rings
02-10-05, 09:58 PM I love the Spellsword Prestiege class but 5% arcane Spell failure is pretty high. That means one in twenty spells will fail. That's one spell going wrong every 5 encounters or so depending on how high your level is. It's not prohibitively high, but definitely keep a wand handy in case one of you heavy spells don't go through.
Endarire
02-10-05, 10:01 PM Still Spell must be prepared for Wizards and other prepatory casters.

-EE
Valkrist
02-11-05, 01:14 AM That's why God invented Sudden Still. :)
Nephlite
02-11-05, 08:09 AM That's why God invented Sudden Still. :)
Which God Lloth, Baccob, Wee Jas?

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Judo on the rocks 02-09-05, 08:35 PM	I was just working on equipment im going to buy for my Mage and was thinking of geting Bracers of Armour +1 or +2 which ever i could afford but then i saw the buckler and said to myself "a +1 buckler does just the same thing with only 5% spell failure and much cheaper." Well i didn't really like the idea of even 5% spell failure so i forgot about the buckler for a while untill i was reading about Mithril and its properties and i said "this is just what i need." So instead of Bracers of Armour +2 worth 4000gp im thinking of buying a mithril buckler +1 2015gp. Does anyone see any problems with this method?
Wolf72 02-09-05, 09:26 PM	if both are available I don't see a real problem with it ... up to the DM and what s/he says is available.
Nephlite 02-09-05, 09:39 PM	I was just working on equipment im going to buy for my Mage and was thinking of geting Bracers of Armour +1 or +2 which ever i could afford but then i saw the buckler and said to myself "a +1 buckler does just the same thing with only 5% spell failure and much cheaper." Well i didn't really like the idea of even 5% spell failure so i forgot about the buckler for a while untill i was reading about Mithril and its properties and i said "this is just what i need." So instead of Bracers of Armour +2 worth 4000gp im thinking of buying a mithril buckler +1 2015gp. Does anyone see any problems with this method? Why don't you try getting both: Armor and shield bonuses stack so you should be able to get both.
Nom 02-09-05, 10:30 PM	As a general rule, I'm not a big fan of bracers below +4. Mage armour lasts 1 hour / level and it's only a level 1 spell. Admittedly, it's also dispellable. But yes, an enhanced mithral buckler is good value, is significantly cheaper than bracers, and stacks with mage armour. Bracers are primarily useful for monks or if you want an armour bonus greater than +4.
SD 02-10-05, 12:09 AM	It always surprises me how many people find any measure of arcane spell failure unacceptable. If you're really bent on the cheaper armors, a +1 heavy mithral shield is barely more expensive than a buckler and gives +3 shield to AC for only 5% failure and mithral chain is cheaper for a +4 armor bonus at 10% failure. If you really have that hard of a time trying not to roll 1s and 2s on a d20, go right ahead and take the mithril buckler since not even the lack of proficiency will harm you, but I don't see how theoretically losing 10% of your spells is more important than theoretically upping your opponent's odds of missing you in melee by 20%. SD Edit: Granted, this doesn't hold all the way up -- full plate and all associated penalties just isn't worth it for a wizard unless there's a plan going. But I feel 10% is a negligible amount.
allenchan 02-10-05, 12:11 AM	Are we talking just for magic users here, or in general? With a lot of charactesr I play I use bracers of armor because their max dex would otherwise by hampered by even the most unrestrictive armors and eliminates armor check penalties altogether
spyderfreek 02-10-05, 01:11 AM	[QUOTE=SD]It always surprises me how many people find any measure of arcane spell failure unacceptable. If you're really bent on the cheaper armors, a +1 heavy mithral shield is barely more expensive than a buckler and gives +3 shield to AC for only 5% failure and mithral chain is cheaper for a +4 armor bonus at 10% failure. Granted Mithril is not that expensive, but it also depends on how you play. In our world Mithril is fairly uncommon and usually only found with good dwarven or elven smithies who are loath to part with it not non-types.
Rulebook 02-10-05, 01:11 AM	and why bother? youve never gone up against a lot of incorporeal opponents have you? its fun watching the +5 adamantine full plate / +5 Mithral Shield with +5 defending spikes on it go up against a wraith, and get slapped around, completely bypassing his armor, leaving him essentially AC 11. Bracers of armor are a force effect, so incorporeal creatures cant strike through it like normal armor. its wonderful. and also, when you manage to get a dex higher than 28 or so (from whatever means) even padded armor cant keep up with your dex bonus (+9 and up) but bracers dont have dex bonuses, so its all good. +6 Bracers, +5 ring, +5 large mithral shield is some nice AC, with no max dex. think about that, huh?
Judo on the rocks 02-10-05, 01:28 AM	[QUOTE=SD]a +1 heavy mithral shield is barely more expensive than a buckler and gives +3 shield to AC for only 5% failure and mithral chain is cheaper for a +4 armor bonus at 10% failure. . I wouldn't use the shield because it means i don't have a free hand to cast spells with, unless i don't hold a sword. Also does anyone know of a feat that removes spell failure? eg Like if you take this feat you can ignore 10% of spell failure chance, so i can use that mithril chain shirt without spell failure. Thanks
colm_l 02-10-05, 04:00 AM	It always surprises me how many people find any measure of arcane spell failure unacceptable. It's a seriously obnoxious mechanic. Not only does it slow play but also robs a wizard of most of his versatility at low levels (not as bad for combat spells but when you have 2/3 3rd level spells you can't really prepare two fly just in case).
EvilVegan 02-10-05, 04:02 AM	Battle caster (feat) does that, but you need to be able to ignore some of it already, perhaps by taking Spell Sword or something.
DM Zoc 02-10-05, 05:41 AM	Actually, battle caster only lets you wear heavier armor without any spell failure; you still need the ability to wear some level of armor without ASF, and it does nothing to deal with percent reductions. Bracers of Armor gets most of its use from monks, who can use this to achieve a very worthwhile AC and who can't use shields regardless.
Evil Wizard 02-10-05, 10:05 AM	A lot of people consider spell failure an unacceptable risk because wizards live and die by their spell selection. If a fighter misses in combat, he's got plenty more sword swings in him, and he has lots of hit points and armor to depend on. The wizard has his limited daily selection of spells. That's it. If you absolutely have to squeeze off a dimension door to save your life, do you really want to have to worry about a 10% chance of botching the spell? A rogue can just keep fiddling with a lock until he gets it open, but a mage only gets one shot at Bull's Strength. That said, some people don't mind living a little on the edge. A 5% chance of failure is a 1 on a d20. People who routinely roll average results shouldn't suffer too much from wearing a buckler. People like me who routinely roll 1s care a little more. But most people are bothered by any chance of failure since you can't take 10 on spell rolls. The mithril buckler is a brilliant idea, though. That's a potential +6 to a wizard's AC right there, and you can load it up with special abilities, too.
Joe Khol 02-10-05, 12:33 PM	So instead of Bracers of Armour +2 worth 4000gp im thinking of buying a mithril buckler +1 2015gp. Does anyone see any problems with this method? The only problem I can see is that you loose the bonus for the buckler when you're flat-footed or when you use the hand it's attached to (an issue if you use a bow or crossbow).
pres_man 02-10-05, 12:46 PM	To avoid spell failure with armor, try using scrolls and wands.
Chazmon 02-10-05, 12:59 PM	heres an idea i love the idea for the mithril shield but when you cast a spell why not put it down? when you cast a spell you normally back off and cast why not drop it? all the benifits of the shield in combat none of the penalties the same goes for swimming who realisticly goes swimming carrying a shield?
Draco Strang 02-10-05, 03:09 PM	heres an idea i love the idea for the mithril shield but when you cast a spell why not put it down? when you cast a spell you normally back off and cast why not drop it? all the benifits of the shield in combat none of the penalties the same goes for swimming who realisticly goes swimming carrying a shield? Thing is, you don't carry a shield so much as you wear it. Anything you carry has a handgrip and a loop for your arm. The good ones have loops that you can tighten up, and extra cordage to wrap you hand up in, so even if your grip goes slack, you can still maintain an effective hold on it. That's the thing about taking it off. It's a standard action I believe, to get out of one and throw it on the ground.
SD 02-10-05, 03:13 PM	heres an idea i love the idea for the mithril shield but when you cast a spell why not put it down? when you cast a spell you normally back off and cast why not drop it? all the benifits of the shield in combat none of the penaltiesIf by "all the benefits" you mean "only one benefit at a time, since when you drop the shield you no longer have the AC from the shield and are more likely to get plugged in the face with an arrow or ten", then yes. You're either using a shield or not. When you're using the shield, you get all relevant bonuses and penalties; when you're not, you don't. There is no middle ground.
Wharin 02-10-05, 03:24 PM	youve never gone up against a lot of incorporeal opponents have you? its fun watching the +5 adamantine full plate / +5 Mithral Shield with +5 defending spikes on it go up against a wraith, and get slapped around, completely bypassing his armor, leaving him essentially AC 11. Wait, you can do that? Not to go derail this topic, but that actually works? OMG, i think my head just exploded. Wow. Now do the spikes need to be on the shield, or can they be on the full plate? (Seriously, there is absolutely no sarcasm meant in this post, i just never thought of doing that)
kjenks 02-10-05, 03:25 PM	To avoid spell failure with armor, try using scrolls and wands. Wands are fine, but in 3.5e, arcane scrolls have arcane spell failure. Yes, that means the Magic Domain ain't what it used to be. Oh, and Rulebook, Defending would work, so your buddy would be AC 16.
Rulebook 02-10-05, 04:25 PM	yes, you can do the +5 defending spikes (but its tricky with the rules to keep it moving if you guys are real rules lawers, but im guessing since you didnt already know about this, you guys arent. go wild dude!) you have to enchant armor/shield spikes seperately from whatever they're attached to, as well as pay seperate masterwork costs and everything. but otherwise they're treated as light weapons for all intents and purposes, so you can put any enchantment you could put on a light piercing weapon on them.
Von Helmet 02-10-05, 04:38 PM	Oh, and Rulebook, Defending would work, so your buddy would be AC 16. He left out the 10 everyone gets on the character sheet. It would actually be a 26 AC. 10 + 6 Bracers, + 5 ring, + 5 large mithral shield = 26
Twylyght 02-10-05, 04:45 PM	yes +5 shield with +5 spikes of defending would work. It would need to be at least a light shield, but yes iut would work. question though is is it worth the price at that point. +5 light shield: 25,159 +5 spikes of defending(+6 weapon): 72,310 total cost: 97,469 total ac bonus +11 and of almost no use against touch and incorporeal creatures, or while flat footed however for 96,000. +8 bracers of armor: 64,000 +4 ring of protection: 32,000 +12 to ac, and usefull againt incorporeal, touch attacks, and while flat footed. If your playing in a game where you could afford to get all 4, then do it by all means :), just in my opinion, start with force or deflection items that are always protecting, then add to that. though thats all just my 2 coppers.
tarkin 02-10-05, 05:01 PM	1) IIRC, Mithril can not totally eliminate Arcane Spell Failure chance, which I think the first poster was not aware of. The minimum a Mithral Buckler gets is 5% Spell Failure Chance. This was confirmed in a Sage ruling. You need a Prestige Class to eliminate that 5%. 2) Arcane Spell Failure only applies to spells with Somatic Components. You can Teleport freely, and use any spell that has had the Still spell feat applied without worrying about ASF. 3) To get Defending bonuses, you must be making an attack with the weapon. This means that you can not cast a spell while benefiting from Defending weapons, unless you are a Choker and have an extra Standard Action a round. Few spell casters consider a Defending weapon worth it. As always, your DM is of course allowed to ignore the rules and do what he wants, forcing you to play in a super-munchkin game.
Nom 02-10-05, 05:06 PM	If you absolutely have to squeeze off a dimension door to save your life, do you really want to have to worry about a 10% chance of botching the spell?Being picky: dimension door is one of the few spells that is V only, so ASF doesn't apply. :)
Wharin 02-10-05, 06:08 PM	yes, you can do the +5 defending spikes (but its tricky with the rules to keep it moving if you guys are real rules lawers, but im guessing since you didnt already know about this, you guys arent. go wild dude!) you have to enchant armor/shield spikes seperately from whatever they're attached to, as well as pay seperate masterwork costs and everything. but otherwise they're treated as light weapons for all intents and purposes, so you can put any enchantment you could put on a light piercing weapon on them. Well among my friends i am the rules lawyer... Noone just ever tried this combo. And i don't have the DMG, because I know myself and i dont want to metagame, and it is just easier if i stay out of the DMG and MM, but anyway, here are my questions: Does it matter where the spikes are? Can it be the spike on a spike shield? Can they be armour spikes? Probably either, right? Do you need to attack with them to activate the defending ability? Something tells me you do. Which means if you do, unless you want to take a huge penalty to attacks, you need two weapon fighting to gain the benefit of the defending. What kind of bonus does Defending give? Would it stack with another defending weapon?
Wolf72 02-10-05, 06:27 PM	1) IIRC, Mithril can not totally eliminate Arcane Spell Failure chance, which I think the first poster was not aware of. The minimum a Mithral Buckler gets is 5% Spell Failure Chance. This was confirmed in a Sage ruling. You need a Prestige Class to eliminate that 5%. you wouldn't be able to cite that would you? I'd like to see that post/article/(whatever) ... there is nothing written in the rules that says all armors/shields have a minimum ASF. [edit] ... if there were, they could have easily written in "armor made of mithral reduces ASF by 10%, but never below 5%" (or something to that effect)
Vintus 02-10-05, 06:28 PM	A spell failure of 5% or 10% isn't that much, unless you've seen someone with a run a bad luck try to cast 4 spells and have each one burned due to the spell failure. If you can afford it, a +1 Mithral Chain Shirt of Twilight(Book of Exalted Deeds) will run you 5100gp and gives you an AC5 and NO spell failure.
Edymnion 02-10-05, 07:06 PM	Mithril Shirt and a Mithril Buckler is that +5 base AC, with only 10% ASF for a little over 2,000 gp. Which you can then enchant up. The mithril shirt gives you a max AC +9, compared to the max AC +8 of the bracers, and its cheaper to boot.
Illithid Tentacles 02-10-05, 07:45 PM	It always surprises me how many people find any measure of arcane spell failure unacceptable. Because it's likely to come back and kick you right in the nuts when you absolutely need to cast a spell to save your ass, and you really can't afford to lose a round because your spell failed. A 5% ASF means that, on average, 1 in 20 of the spells you cast that have somatic components will fail. Plus there's the fact that you have to look up whether the spell you're casting even has a somatic component, and if it does then you have to make an extra dice roll. It may not seem like much, but the extra time can really add up.
Ironwulf 02-10-05, 08:11 PM	Hi. any reason you couldn't use the feat Still Spell. No somatic component = no ASF, and it only bumps up the spell level by one.
Giver_of_Rings 02-10-05, 09:58 PM	I love the Spellsword Prestiege class but 5% arcane Spell failure is pretty high. That means one in twenty spells will fail. That's one spell going wrong every 5 encounters or so depending on how high your level is. It's not prohibitively high, but definitely keep a wand handy in case one of you heavy spells don't go through.
Endarire 02-10-05, 10:01 PM	Still Spell must be prepared for Wizards and other prepatory casters. -EE
Valkrist 02-11-05, 01:14 AM	That's why God invented Sudden Still. :)
Nephlite 02-11-05, 08:09 AM	That's why God invented Sudden Still. :) Which God Lloth, Baccob, Wee Jas?