Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Harmor 07-30-04, 05:42 AM	From SRD:Bracers of Armor: These items appear to be wrist or arm guards. They 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 must be worn for the magic to be effective. Moderate conjuration; CL 7th; Craft Wondrous Item (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/theraven_stephenh/feats/CRAFT_WONDROUS_ITEM.html), mage armor (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/theraven_stephenh/spells/Mage_Armor.html), creator’s caster level must be at least two times that of the bonus placed in the bracers; Price 1,000 gp (+1), 4,000 gp (+2), 9,000 gp (+3), 16,000 gp (+4), 25,000 gp (+5), 36,000 gp (+6), 49,000 gp (+7), 64,000 gp (+8);Weight 1 lb. Notice that a set of Bracers of Armor is a wondrous item. Now what if I wanted to add armor properties to it? For example: +1 Bracers of Acid Resistance Armor: 1,000gp + 18,000gp = 19,000gp +1 Bracers of Shadow Armor: 1,000gp + 3,750gp = 4,750gp +1 Bracers of Heavy Fortification (+5 bonus) Armor: (+6 bonus total) 36,000gp Is what I suggested here correct? I would first use Craft Wondrous Item to create the Bracers of Armor then add the armor properties using the Craft Magic Arms and Armor? Basically is a Bracers of Armor considered to be the equivalent of a magical set of full-plate for purposes of adding armor properties? The reason I'm asking is because its much cheaper to add armor properties to a set of bracers that are +1 than to a set of full-plate that is +5.
diablos666 07-30-04, 05:44 AM	Don't see why not. Though you wouldn't need the ghost touch ability as bracers create a force effect which works against incorporeal opponents.
Harmor 07-30-04, 05:46 AM	Good point...let me change that real quick. LOL
Naeron 07-30-04, 06:45 AM	Going by the DMG, no you can't without DM fiat. They are abilities that can be added to armour only. So what you would be doing is creating a custom wondrous item which should price out as such (additional powers, slot affinities etc) so that needs DM adjudication. However the Arms and Equipment Guide has an optional rule to allow this to be done.
Harmor 07-30-04, 08:22 AM	Arms and Equipment Guide is 3.0.
Seeker95 07-30-04, 02:33 PM	I agree with Naeron. To add armor abilities to bracers would require DM approval. As the primary DM in my game, I would allow it under one condition: such bracers are then counted as "armor" for class restriction purposes. However, such abilities do not suddenly add ASF.
tarkin 07-30-04, 02:38 PM	Counted as "armour" for class purposes??? What type of armour? Light Armour? Medium Armour? Heavy ARmour? Will it stop monk abilities? ranger abilities? Barbarian Abilities? Makes no sense to me. It is not armour and should not count that way.
Sisyfos 07-30-04, 03:05 PM	Originally posted by tarkin Counted as "armour" for class purposes??? What type of armour? Light Armour? Medium Armour? Heavy ARmour? Will it stop monk abilities? ranger abilities? Barbarian Abilities? Makes no sense to me. It is not armour and should not count that way. Seeker is trying to balance bracers when their options are added. Anyhow there exists an OPTIONAL rule that bracers can be enchanted like that in A&EG as was stated earlier. Implementing that rule is up to the DM. Just be careful that suddenly bracers do not become the best armor out there or the balance of power shifts even further towards favoring spellcasters.
Seeker95 07-30-04, 03:07 PM	Originally posted by tarkin Counted as "armour" for class purposes??? [...] Makes no sense to me. It is not armour and should not count that way. You are being beligerent, not clueless. I gave a conditional approval to using armor enhancements on bracers. That condition is that you cannot use bracers as "armor" unless they are treated like armor. Monks? Lose the abilities. Bracers are light, so there is not a really big question as to whether they would be light, medium, or heavy armor. If you object to the restriction, then bracers should not be able to get armor enhancements. No problem.
tarkin 07-30-04, 03:09 PM	No they don't. Bracers still are relatively low in AC. Yes, they are best for a Spell caster or monk, but only because all other Armor for spellcasters SUCKS. Any Paladin, Fighter, Cleric should get Platemail and enchant it +5.
Lord Splendor 07-30-04, 03:09 PM	In the unearthed arcana on pg 110 at the bottom. It does mention...... Characters may still desire the properties of specific kind of magic armor or of armor special abilities. Be prepared to create new magic items, such as cloaks, robes, vests or vestments to support those desires. So even if you didn't allow +1 Bracers of fortification you could easily allow a +1 vest of fortification.
tarkin 07-30-04, 03:17 PM	Originally posted by Seeker95 You are being beligerent, not clueless. I gave a conditional approval to using armor enhancements on bracers. That condition is that you cannot use bracers as "armor" unless they are treated like armor. Monks? Lose the abilities. Bracers are light, so there is not a really big question as to whether they would be light, medium, or heavy armor. If you object to the restriction, then bracers should not be able to get armor enhancements. No problem. I was not being beligerant, you were making a bad house rule, as proven by the fact that you just modified it. It was not obvious that you meant Light. If you meant Light then you you should have said so. They are not "Light" they are not-armor. For all I know you were house ruling something very weird calling them armor, but not any type. I personally see no problem with bracers getting the enchantments without the restrictions. Bracers in the rules are allowed to be worn by monks without any kind of problem. The kind of enchantment on them should not change that. The entire point of the Bonus system to armor is that say Light Fortification is supposed to be exactly equal in power to another +1 in armor. If you accept that as truth, then there is NO reason to not have +1 Bracers with Light Fortification costing the same as +2 armor. If you think that Light Fortification is in fact MORE powerfull than a +1, then your problem is with the Armor system, not the Bracers.
Sisyfos 07-30-04, 03:18 PM	Originally posted by tarkin No they don't. Bracers still are relatively low in AC. Yes, they are best for a Spell caster or monk, but only because all other Armor for spellcasters SUCKS. Any Paladin, Fighter, Cleric should get Platemail and enchant it +5. Let me see: Enchantable bracers vs. +5 adamantium full plate Bracers Base AC 8 Max dex: unlimited Possible good enchantments: fortification, shadow, silent, resistances, sr. Adamantium full plate: Base AC 8+5=13 Max dex=1 DR 3/- ACP & ASF Max movement rate: 20 feet normally. Cannot run at 4xspeed Possible good enchantments: fortification, shadow, silent, resistances, sr. So what do we get... at even decent dex mods like 14+6(enchantment) the bracers almost reach the full plate in AC, in addition they allow a lot more movement. At high dex mods (which are common at high levels) we are getting to the situation when bracers of armor suddenly give better ac, better movement, less skill penalties + hassle and equal other enchantments. I know that the bracers are more expensive than a full plate but eventually enchantable bracers are a lot better armor than a full plate... so picking a full plate for combat becomes just plain stupid at high levels, and that is just plain wrong IMO. Sisyfos
tarkin 07-30-04, 03:22 PM	Sisfo, you made a lot of BAD assumptions with your logic. Try again like this: 1) If they have high Dex, characters are smart enough to use Mithral armor. If you want to compare the Adamantine Platemail, then you have to admit they are MUCH more powerfull than the AC alone, as the DR is valuable. Max Dex for Mithral Plate is 3, not +1. So it takes a Dex of 18 before that begins to matter. 2) Characters are NOT paragons/munchkins with all 5 scores above 13. An ranged Fighter would have a Dex of 18+. A very lucky regular fighter or Cleric might occasionally have it. No Paladin should EVER have it that high. They need strength, Con, Charisma, Wisdom too badly to waste a 14+ in Dex unless they are a munchkin or a Paragon race. I doubt that they would even pay the huge amount for the magic item to raise it above 18, there are cheaper ways to increase your defensive capabilities. So a standard, non-munchkin Paladin would always prefer the Mithral Platemail, as would almost all clerics and most fighters.
Tony Vargas 07-30-04, 03:39 PM	Being proficient in armor use is supposed to be a good thing, and having class abilities that suffer from armor use is supposed to be a limitation. If you can cherry-pick the few advantages armor-wearing characters do get, that wouldn't be the case anymore, would it? Frankly, I think the Fortification, for instance, should have a fixed cost (+3 maybe), and how effective it is should be based on the type of armor it's put on - full plate should give you 'heavy' fortification, a chain shirt should always be 'light' fortification. Making other armor add-ons work that way would also be good. For instance, if the amount elemental resistance was based on armor type or armor bonus or something... aside: Platemail tarkin? ;) You're making me feel old.
Sisyfos 07-30-04, 03:48 PM	Originally posted by tarkin Sisfo, you made a lot of BAD assumptions with your logic. --- So a standard, non-munchkin Paladin would always prefer the Mithral Platemail, as would almost all clerics and most fighters. Why tell that players won't be munchkins when you yourself propose some munchkin rules to encourage muchkining. Anyhow, if you really do think that no fighter will ever have high dex you must know something that I do not know. I just look at the mechanics being suggested here and point out that they do make bracers better in combat than plate mails are in a lot of situations and for many characters. The higher the characters go in levels the more I, even now, see the dynamics favor unarmored combatants as stats get higher (level bonuses, enchantments, inherent bonuses, polymorphs et cetera are all ever increasing factors at high levels) and various magical effects come into play. By allowing enchantable bracers that balance shifts even further. I wonder how I am misinterpreting this situation... perhaps I am just stupid or my education did not prepare me for anything as complicated as d20 dynamics? Sisyfos
Harmor 07-30-04, 04:43 PM	Can you add Wondrous Item properties onto a weapon or armor? (i.e. could you had a +4 strength bonus to a sword like you would a Gauntlets of Ogre Power accounting for placing multiple abilities into a magical item?). If so then you should be able to add armor properties to a Wondrous Item. I want to munchkin this if Bracers can have Armor properties. Full Plate +5 costs (+5 bonus) 25,000gp Bracers +1 with Heavy Fortificaion cost (+6 bonus) 36,000gp Wearing both at the same time you get don't get the AC benifit from the Bracers +1 (Bracers +1 give a +1 AC bonus which does not stack with the Full Plate +5), but you get the Fortification benifit. Thus you are effectively wearing: Full Plate +5 with Heavy Fortification which costs (+10 bonus) 100,000gp with the requirement that your Bracer slot is also taken up.
BlackSmith 07-30-04, 05:22 PM	Originally posted by Harmor Can you add Wondrous Item properties onto a weapon or armor? (i.e. could you had a +4 strength bonus to a sword like you would a Gauntlets of Ogre Power accounting for placing multiple abilities into a magical item?). If so then you should be able to add armor properties to a Wondrous Item. sure you can. a +1 weapon that gives +4 to Str also would cost as much has +1 weapon plus twice the price of the second power (as per magic creation rules). price is heafty altrough you save a slot. Originally posted by Harmor I want to munchkin this if Bracers can have Armor properties. Full Plate +5 costs (+5 bonus) 25,000gp Bracers +1 with Heavy Fortificaion cost (+6 bonus) 36,000gp Wearing both at the same time you get don't get the AC benifit from the Bracers +1 (Bracers +1 give a +1 AC bonus which does not stack with the Full Plate +5), but you get the Fortification benifit. Thus you are effectively wearing: Full Plate +5 with Heavy Fortification which costs (+10 bonus) 100,000gp with the requirement that your Bracer slot is also taken up. mmm.... and? your point being? if a DM would allow (i would not) based on that fact that unslotted item has double price, item that takes two slots should (IF the DM allows) have half the price based on the unslotted logic. thus +5 heavy fortification armor that takes bracers and armor slot would cost only 50kgp. thats still 11kgp below your uber munchiking abjuse. btw AaEG is valid for 3,5 as there has been no coversion about it.
Seeker95 07-30-04, 05:25 PM	Originally posted by tarkin I was not being beligerant, you were making a bad house rule, as proven by the fact that you just modified it. It was not obvious that you meant Light. You're right. It was not obvious. But instead of just asking what type of armor I would make it, you discounted the idea. I do not normally see you being clueless. Your reply indicated objection, not confusion. You were being beligerent. Or at least smug.Originally posted by Sisyfos Why tell that players won't be munchkins when you yourself propose some munchkin rules to encourage muchkining.tarkin's outline was not munchkinizing. It was maximizing. Maximizing means that you don't wear heavy armor if you have a high Dex. Maximizing assumes that if your concept is for a high Dex, you will choose armor that lets you use it. Munchkin is when you assume a fighter is going to have a high Dexterity. Munchkin is when you assume a Paladin has enough stats to place a high score in Dexterity after getting the necessary Wisdom and Charisma scores.
Sisyfos 07-30-04, 06:32 PM	Originally posted by Seeker95 tarkin's outline was not munchkinizing. It was maximizing. Maximizing means that you don't wear heavy armor if you have a high Dex. Maximizing assumes that if your concept is for a high Dex, you will choose armor that lets you use it. Munchkin is when you assume a fighter is going to have a high Dexterity. Munchkin is when you assume a Paladin has enough stats to place a high score in Dexterity after getting the necessary Wisdom and Charisma scores. Here, have a cookie :cookie: and one for Tarkin too :cookie: . Just so you have something to munch while I point out a few things. First of all I never assumed anything. I pointed out a shift in balance of power that happens when bracers can be enchanted. I am capable of noticing these things having spent a lot of time at the CO forum. You two are being very defensive of your turf in this forum. So instead of attacking my person go refute my arguments. Sisyfos
Seeker95 07-30-04, 07:29 PM	Originally posted by Sisyfos Here, have a cookie :cookie: and one for Tarkin too :cookie: . Just so you have something to munch while I point out a few things. Sisyfos, you accused tarkin of using munchkin ideas while denouncing munchkin ideas. And the little boldfaced "you" was cute. If you really think the world revolves around you so confidently that every use of the word you automatically means Sisyfos, then you will quickly find yourself accused of lots of things you claim never to have said. If you believe we were attacking your person, then you should report the offending post to the moderators. Your arguments were refuted by tarkin. Your accusations agaisnt him were refuted by me. You took both personally.
Sisyfos 07-31-04, 04:14 AM	Originally posted by Seeker95 If you believe we were attacking your person, then you should report the offending post to the moderators. Your arguments were refuted by tarkin. Your accusations agaisnt him were refuted by me. You took both personally. Oh, but but my arguments were not refuted by Tarkin.
Iku Rex 07-31-04, 11:04 AM	Originally posted by Harmor Arms and Equipment Guide is 3.0. As I understand it, the general rule is that 3.0 material can be used in 3.5 as long as it hasn't been changed by a 3.5 product. The rules for adding armor abilities to bracers of armor are not 3.0 specific.
BlackSmith 07-31-04, 12:29 PM	Originally posted by Iku Rex As I understand it, the general rule is that 3.0 material can be used in 3.5 as long as it hasn't been changed by a 3.5 product. like i said earlier, if no conversion is published the 3.0 versions are compatible with 3,5 .
Seeker95 07-31-04, 01:58 PM	Originally posted by Iku Rex The rules for adding armor abilities to bracers of armor are not 3.0 specific. So, as long as you are permitting non-core material in your campaign, there is published justification for allowing armor enhancements on bracers.
Count Arioch the 28th 07-31-04, 11:36 PM	My personal ruling is that I allow armor enhancements to be applied to bracers of armor. My reasons are as such: 1. Bracers of armor give an armor bonus. They have shown that they don't count against a monk's abilities, despite giving an armor bonus. Therefore, I see no need to ban it. 2. Barcers of armor will always have inferior AC bonuses comapred to regular armor. A suit of hide armor costs a few gold. Bracers of armor +3 will cost 9,000 gp (If I recall the bracers of armor calculations correctly.) 3. (House rule in my game) Regular armor grants a small amount of DR. (Hide armor grants DR 1/-). Bracers of armor do not grant any DR, again, amking them inferior to regular armor. Therefore, with two rules supported reasons and one personal house rule supported reason, I feel safe in allowing armor enhancements to be added to Bracers of Armor. So far, the only people who take advantage of it are people who wouldn't wear armor anyway, as it's fairly clear that wearing armor is in all ways superior to using bracers. Although I've used a few NPCs with armor AND rbacers, as a cheaper way to increase armor abilities, but as most armor abilities either don't stack, or aren't that good, I see no inbalance in doing so. You can do what you want, but I feel I've made the correct decision for my campaign.