Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Earl Power 02-08-07, 08:12 AM	Is it just me or does it seem like this was meant to work with Mage Armour too?
Redeemer of Ogar 02-08-07, 09:55 AM	Is it just me or does it seem like this was meant to work with Mage Armour too? It was clearly INTENDED to work with Mage Armor. It just as clearly does NOT, though are a couple spells floating around that it does work with (one of them is the glowing armor spell in Book of Exalted Deeds, which is WAY overpowered for the price of a Lesser Restoration every day.)
Earl Power 02-08-07, 12:42 PM	It was clearly INTENDED to work with Mage Armor. It just as clearly does NOT, though are a couple spells floating around that it does work with (one of them is the glowing armor spell in Book of Exalted Deeds, which is WAY overpowered for the price of a Lesser Restoration every day.) I think since we dont have BoED, i will try to run Mage armour past my DM. Anybody else who has convinced their DM to let them use it?
SageBahamut 02-08-07, 12:56 PM	There's really no need to use it for Mage Armor. even though, yes, it was clearly intended to, there are so many more RAW-legal ways to get a disgusting AC with no spell failure (mithril twilight full plate + thistledown shirt, for instance) that you really don't lose much for this obvious contradiction. And besides, it still works with Shield, which also gives a nice bonus. If you really must have it for some reason, go through the effort to research a new spell. Then not only will you have what you want, but nobody else will be able to copy you.
Father Dale 02-08-07, 07:37 PM	Ya, quickened Shields that give +9 AC is pretty good by itself. Also, theres a spell in Dragonlance from the Legends of the Twins book called Temporal Shield. It works exactly the same as Shield except its 2nd level and gives a +6 shield bonus to AC. So a 5th lvl Abjurant Champion could cast that as a swift action to get a +11 shield bonus to AC. Not too shabby.
Jaffolofolus 02-09-07, 03:50 AM	I posted this very question not so long back! I seem to be in the lucky position where my GM has allowed the funky abjurant abilities to work on mage armour, as he agreed that from the book, it was clearly intended to do so. Having said that, I think one of the main reasons he agreed is that my character is a sorcerer, and has very few abjuration spells. ie I would not see much benefit from the class as a whole if mage armour was not one of the spells covered. I am not sure he would have been so lenient if I was playing a wizard, and could change my spells on a daily basis. However, as has been suggested, it should also be possible to research and invent an abjurant armour spell (effectively mage armour - but abjuration school) altho this may be both time consuming and expensive. (Unless whoever is teaching you to be an abjurant champion has already invented it :) )
Broken vacuum 02-09-07, 04:59 AM	I am actually not that sure that it was intended by all parties for the feature to work with mage armour. If you ignore the example character it is not that clear, and in my experience it is not very unusual for WotC's example characters to be built in ignorance of certain rules. The thing is that, as is, a 5th level Abjurant Champion has an ability that is about on par with the ability to cast in light armour. Especially if you count Greater Mage Armour, which is in Complete Arcane that Complete Mage references quite a bit. The Abjurant Champion receives a net increase of 15 to his AC from spells (+9 from Shield and +6 from Greater Mage Armour) and so does a generic caster that can cast in light armour (+9 from a +5 chain shirt and +6 from a +5 buckler). Sure, you can add armour improvements on the equipment, but on the other hand you do not have to fork over 50,000+gp if you use the spells.
DarknessEternal 02-10-07, 02:12 AM	The official ajudication of this question can be found in the Q&A portion of this website. Abjurant Champion's ability does not impact Mage Armor.
Cold Napalm 02-10-07, 04:01 AM	Because the guy who wrote up the class did not want to look stupid for not knowing that mage armor is in the fetish...I mean conjuration school. Of course he still looks pretty dumb since the example character clearly has the ability working on his mage armor spell and the ability description specifically says mage armor. Another fine example of quality workmanship you can come to expect from wizards these days. No really, I'm kinda curious if they even have a QA department anymore :weep: .
Broken vacuum 02-10-07, 04:13 AM	Of course he still looks pretty dumb since the example character clearly has the ability working on his mage armor spell and the ability description specifically says mage armor. The ability description does actually not say that it works with Mage Armour. After describing what it works on, there is a sentence describing what Abjurant Champions generally use for armour, which is not at all the same thing. The thing is, had the example character not been there, the case for the ability being intended to work on Mage Armour would be very weak.
Nezkrul 02-11-07, 08:50 AM	Easy solution if you want mage armor to work is to just make mage armor a dual school spell with abjuration (force).
moridain 02-27-07, 08:05 AM	Easy solution if you want mage armor to work is to just make mage armor a dual school spell with abjuration (force). I like this idea, but then what happens to wizards with prohibited school conjuration or abjuration? As far as i know a major reason for Mage Armor to be Conjuration is to give specialist wizards with prohibited school abjuration some much needed defense. Also, dumb question again, but what book were the duel school spells in again? I cant seem to find them. :embarrass