Post/Author/DateTime	Post
The_Dark_One 01-28-04, 04:45 AM	Does anyone know if this has been officially covered anywhere? I'd like to possibly get something like this for my wizard character. Maybe just have an outfit that only provides the magical bonus? I'd like to avoid houserules if there is something actually put out by Wizards on the subject. Thanks....
Lysiander 01-28-04, 05:22 AM	Asside from adding Armor Bonus, not really. You can emulate many properties using the right spells as constant enchantment (or, as we did, the prices for armor enchantments as guidelines.), but I would refrain from using unrealistic combinations like "sweatshirt of fortification" or the like. But as fas as I can tell, there are no official rules for using cloth as armor. (Another approach could be seeing leather clothes for example as armor without an armor bonus and enchanting them in the same way armor is enchanted.)
Hypersmurf 01-28-04, 06:00 AM	The rules provide for reslotting of items (eg a Headband of Wisdom), although the price may go up if it's in an inappropriate slot. So just take Bracers of Armor, and reslot for the Vest slot. If your DM uses the A&EG, there are rules in there for adding armor special abilities to Bracers of Armor, so you could conceivably have a Ghost Touch +3 Vest of Light Fortification, or whatever. -Hyp.
wdarkk 01-28-04, 06:16 AM	Also, the DNC has a totally unslotted item called the Gemstone of Fortification or somesuch.
Shima 01-28-04, 07:28 AM	Thats what bracers of armor are for, to replace armor. Its actually a permenant mage armor. If you want to put it in another slot, I think its 1.5x the cost.
Naeron 01-28-04, 08:07 AM	There are no rules that say that you can use a piece of clothing as the basis for crafting magic armour. However the Magic Vestment spell says "An outfit of regular clothing counts as armor that grants no AC bonus for the purpose of this spell." so you may be able to convince your DM that clothing that occupies the armour slot can be enchanted from a base armour bonus of 0. Personally I allow this as a wondrous item using magic vestment applied to clothing that occupies the armour slot and costs bonus squared * 1000gp, but this does not allow additional armour abilities.
Sproik 01-28-04, 09:56 AM	You might want to check this thread (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=170676) out.
Edymnion 01-28-04, 10:53 AM	Or this one: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=166368 My essential jist is, if clothing counts as armor for purposes of enchanting, then it counts as armor for purposes of class restrictions. Aka, all Monks and Duelists, for example, must be completely naked for their class abilities to function, because their clothes count as armor. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either clothes are armor across the board, complete with the penalties for being armor, or they are not armor and cannot be enchanted as such.
Kyuketsukiouji 01-28-04, 10:55 AM	And of course, there are people like me who disagree with him...
Seeker95 01-28-04, 11:29 AM	I walk a slightly middle ground compared to Edymnion. Add armor bonuses to your clothing, and your clothing counts as armor, using the armor slot, and carrying with it the full class restrictions of armor. I give clothing-as-armor a 5% ASF. In any case, monk + clothing-as-armor = impotent.
halzmar of geoff 01-28-04, 11:57 AM	Nothing in the rules says you cannot craft a wonderous item to do anything you want if you are willing to pay the price for it. For example DMG 265 Robe of the ArchMagi gives a +5 bonus to AC, plus several other nifty abitlities. Coupled with the Magic Vestment spell I'd say yes you can enchant a set of clothing provided the maker has the Craft Wonderous Feat. Craft wonderous because clothing is not armor. As clearly stated in the Magic Vestment spell: Target: Armor or shield touched "An outfit of regular clothing counts as armor .... for the purpose of this spell." "for the purpose of this spell" means that clothes do not count as armor whether the spell is cast upon it, or not; only that the clothing is a legitimate target for the Magic Vestment spell. How does one go from "for the purpose of this spell" to for the purpose of determining whether, or not a character is wearing armor? Follow it through to logical conclusion. Can the BBEG cast magic vestment on monk opponents to make a monk totally ineffective in combat? Can the characters do it to an enemy monk?
Seeker95 01-28-04, 12:12 PM	Originally posted by halzmar of geoff Follow it through to logical conclusion. Can the BBEG cast magic vestment on monk opponents to make a monk totally ineffective in combat? Can the characters do it to an enemy monk? Yes. A very effective tactic. Of course, the monk gets a saving throw. Although the spell is harmless, it is still allows a Will save.
Capn Charlie 01-28-04, 01:44 PM	The illogic of this makes my head hurt. If bracers of armor are ok then why not an identical item in every way except it takes up the Vest slot?
Lysiander 01-28-04, 02:16 PM	Well, after reading some through the DMG and PHB I think the way to see this is this one: Robes can be considered clothing. Robes have multiple effects listed as possible enchantments. I personally understand that this means in can use any effect listed on the "Magic Item pricing" table. (Don' have a page right now. It's in the item creation section.) On this table are among others Armor Boni and the like listed. Furthermore, the Robe of the Archmagi give a +5 Armor bonus, which leads me to believe that robes can be considered Armor giving with the right enchantment. However, I retract my previous statement. I think while it is possible to add pretty much any effect listed on the previously mentioned table to a robe, Magic armor is a different table. (And Robes and Armor are found in differend chapters for item creation.) Technically, this leads us to a problem, since the permanent spell effect enchantment would basically allow any enchantment on robes. After some thinking, I guess thats not the way it was intended and the permanent enchantments were only listed on this table to make generally everything possible in a formular. Both sides are justifiable, but balance wise, the best way to handle this would probably be to actually allow robes to use armor like enchantments, but to use the cost of making the spell permanent in the item instead of the armor enchantment table. That way, creating an armor similar robe would pretty quick become an epic item, where I think it's no problem to allow it.
halzmar of geoff 01-28-04, 03:28 PM	Originally posted by Seeker95 Yes. A very effective tactic. Of course, the monk gets a saving throw. Although the spell is harmless, it is still allows a Will save. It's your game and you are free at your table to run it as you see fit. But it is illogical conclusion given the wording of the spell. Claim houserules, or Rule 0 if you want at least you can support the clothing as armor argument with it at your game. However, saying Magic Vestment works on clothing; Magic Vestment works on armor; thus clothing is armor is flawed and unsupportable logic akin to saying since all beagles are dogs; thus all dogs are beagles. Furthermore, the argument of there being a difference between your clothing and armor "slots" is likewise flawed as they generally cover the same area of the body - thus anyone wearing a shirt instead of leather armor already has an item in the "armor" slot unless your unarmored characters wear thier clothing elsewhere. Beyond that looking at Body Slot Affinities on pg 288 of the DMG there is no armor slot. The rules of the game simple don't back up your argument - clothing doesn't count as armor. If you can back up your position with the text of the spell, or an actual rule out of the book I'd be willing to listen to the logic behind your position.
Hypersmurf 01-28-04, 03:52 PM	Furthermore, the argument of there being a difference between your clothing and armor "slots" is likewise flawed as they generally cover the same area of the body - thus anyone wearing a shirt instead of leather armor already has an item in the "armor" slot unless your unarmored characters wear thier clothing elsewhere. Beyond that looking at Body Slot Affinities on pg 288 of the DMG there is no armor slot. MAGIC ITEMS ON THE BODY Many magic items need to be donned by a character who wants to employ them or benefit from their abilities. It’s possible for a creature with a humanoid-shaped body to wear as many as twelve magic items at the same time. However, each of those items must be worn on (or over) a particular part of the body. A humanoid-shaped body can be decked out in magic gear consisting of one item from each of the following groups, keyed to which place on the body the item is worn. One headband, hat, helmet, or phylactery on the head One pair of eye lenses or goggles on or over the eyes One amulet, brooch, medallion, necklace, periapt, or scarab around the neck One vest, vestment, or shirt on the torso One robe or suit of armor on the body (over a vest, vestment, or shirt) One belt around the waist (over a robe or suit of armor) One cloak, cape, or mantle around the shoulders (over a robe or suit of armor) One pair of bracers or bracelets on the arms or wrists One glove, pair of gloves, or pair of gauntlets on the hands One ring on each hand (or two rings on one hand) One pair of boots or shoes on the feet ------ Specifically says you can wear one shirt, and one suit of armor over your shirt. Shirt slot and Armor slot are definitely different. -Hyp.
kreynolds 01-28-04, 03:57 PM	{que W.B. tv add guy voice} "An episode you don't want to miss...Hypersmurf, slayer of the high horse, tonight on the WB." {fade to black}
Sken Dingle 01-28-04, 04:08 PM	In my opinion, as long as you keep with the magic item body slots you can make anything do anything. I gave my players some Ghost Touch Panteloons +2. They act just like the armor, but WITHOUT THE NORMAL ARMOR BONUS. Of course that is the drawback of clothes is that unlike leather or metal, they do not protect you. So if you want a magic shirt +2 you only get the +2 to your armor bonus. Seems fair to me. AND since clothes are not armor and do not give the nromal armnor bonus of armor they can be used by monks and arcane spell casters without hindrance. Seems logical to me.
Edymnion 01-28-04, 05:11 PM	Originally posted by Seeker95 Add armor bonuses to your clothing, and your clothing counts as armor, using the armor slot, and carrying with it the full class restrictions of armor. I give clothing-as-armor a 5% ASF. In any case, monk + clothing-as-armor = impotent. Lol, you know that essentially makes it the same as Padded Armor, right ;)
halzmar of geoff 01-28-04, 05:37 PM	Originally posted by Hypersmurf One vest, vestment, or shirt on the torso One robe or suit of armor on the body (over a vest, vestment, or shirt) Specifically says you can wear one shirt, and one suit of armor over your shirt. Shirt slot and Armor slot are definitely different. -Hyp. Good point about the wearing the shirt under the armor. :tiphat: But it never actually designates a specific slot as an armor slot (note the robe or suit of armor text) - rather it says on your torso slot you can have a shirt and a suit of armor( or a robe) over your shirt. So there still is no such thing as an armor slot at least in the context Seaker95 was using the term. The argument about the faultyness of the logic still stands you cannot wear your shirt over your shirt if you are only wearing one shirt. More to the point the spell in question is Magic Vestment not Magic armor - Vestments as you pointed out go in the shirt slot :D
Hypersmurf 01-28-04, 05:43 PM	Good point about the wearing the shirt under the armor. :tiphat: But it never actually designates a specific slot as an armor slot (note the robe or suit of armor text) - rather it says on your torso slot you can have a shirt and a suit of armor( or a robe) over your shirt. So there still is no such thing as an armor slot at least in the context Seaker95 was using the term. What? Armor or robes don't go in the 'torso' slot, they go in the 'body' slot. Just because the English words are thematically similar doesn't mean that they're the same slot. And just as rings and gauntlets are frequently described as going in the "ring slot" and "gauntlet slot", rather than the "hand slot" and "hands slot", it's perfectly valid to say that armor goes in the "armor slot" or "armor/robe slot", and a shirt goes in the "shirt slot" or "shirt/vest/vestment" slot. -Hyp.
Capn Charlie 01-28-04, 05:49 PM	I just can't see the logic in the argument that an armor bonus for bonus*2*1000gp on the bracer slot is balanced while an armor bonus for bonus*2*1000 gp on the shirt slot is not. I really think the whole "no armor monk" thing is there for no CHEAP armor bonuses so as not to dominate the early field, as well as the fluff encumbrance thing. In my game monks can't benefit from "non-magical Armor" bonuses. That means any item that gives an armor bonus in an anti magic field. For the love of the gods, if Bracers of Armor +4 for 16,000 gp is okay, then a Shirt of Armor for 16,000 gp is too.