Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Daydreamer80 Nov 30, 2014 22:23:53	Barkskin (pg 217 of players).    It makes your ac no lower than 16, regardless of the type of armor you wear.    I have a couple of questions cause it came up in a discussion today in the game i currently play in.  If the ranger has a 16 dexterity and casts Barkskin is his armor class 16, or 19?   If the character has barkskin on him and gets shield of faith cast on him from another source.   Is his ac 16, or 18, or 21?   ( assuming hes wearing no armor so we dont have to worry about his ac being 19 from half plate +2 dex, +2 shield of faith or what have you).   Next we have found a ring of protection, and bracers of defense.    Bracers of defense say using no armor and shield you get a +2 bonus.  Does barkskin spell count as armor?  And if he has these items is his ac 16, 17,18, 19, 21.     ( barkskin only, +ring of prot , +bracers of defense only, ring and bracers,ring bracers and dex).    THANKS.  hopefully i explained what im asking clearly, i think this spell is a little confusing.    My instant interpretation is barksin is a bit like a belt of giant strength.   it raises your str to X if its not there, but if your str is X or higher it has no effect.  But it would seem strange if using a ring of protection on top of barkskin granted no additional protection
#2 Ath-kethin Dec 01, 2014 4:25:21	As written, I would interperet barkskin to be a natual armor bonus - one which does not stack with other armor bonuses.  So, with nothin else, the character's AC would be 16.  If the character was also wearing, say leather armor, the character's AC would also be 16.   A Dexterity modifier would be added to this total, since it is not an armor bonus and specifically states that it is added to your armor class.  So with barkskin and 16 dexterity, the character would have an AC of 19 while barkskin was acive.   Shield of faith would add 2 to the total, for an AC of 21.  Note that since barkskin and shield of faith are both concentration spells, a single character could not cast both of them on themself at the same time.     And I would rule that barkskin counts as natural armor in the same way a lycanthrope or mintaur has natural armor.  It doesn't stack with additional armor that the character might wear, such as scale mail, but stacks with other defensive magic and protection types.
#3 AaronOfBarbaria Dec 01, 2014 4:30:29	The way that I have read the spell is that it sets the absolute no matter what minimum value of your AC to 16 regardless of what modifiers, conditions, items, or features of this or that which might be affecting your armor class.   Wearing leather and possessing a +3 dexterity modifier your AC would normally be 14: with barkskin it is 16. Wearing nothing at all and having a +5 dexterity modifier would normally be 15: with barkskin it is 16. Wearing +3 plate mail your AC would normally be 21: with barkskin it would still be 21, but if something somehow applied a penalty of -6 or more to your AC it would then be 16 and no lower.   Of course, that is just me reading the spell as doing precisely what it says that it does and only that - others are free to do as they please with the spell.
#4 Noctaem Dec 01, 2014 4:42:30	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#5 Kentus Dec 01, 2014 7:53:00	Same as above, even though I allow an armor of 18, if the character is wearing a shield. Mostly due logic, since barkskin is much more like an armor (with AC 16 and not AC 16 + Dex-mod), while a shield hinders the attacks even before an attack is testing this armor. I would most likely let items which enhances AC while not interferring with the "Armor Slot" enhance it further, like Ring of Protection or Staff of Shielding.
(Reply to #3) Daydreamer80	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#7 colemcm Dec 01, 2014 10:56:32	His AC would be 16. Barkskin doesn't interact with Dex and equipment, magical or otherwise. All the spell allows is for your AC to never drop below 16. If your AC is already higher than 16, the spell does nothing for you.   It may not seem great, but it helps if you're a druid in a powerful animal form with an AC lower than 16.
#8 Daydreamer80 Dec 01, 2014 11:42:04	So, my original interpretation was correct then?  It is like having a belt of giant strength.    If your strength is less than X, it raises it to X.   If your strength is X or higher already, it does nothing for you.
#9 colemcm Dec 01, 2014 11:52:33	Right.
#10 xirr2000 Dec 01, 2014 11:53:31	Ath-kethin wrote:
#11 Daydreamer80 Dec 01, 2014 12:31:54	I just wish the writing was clear , so the raw would not need interpretation.
#12 Noctaem Dec 01, 2014 12:38:13	Daydreamer80 wrote:
#13 colemcm Dec 01, 2014 13:04:06	I think the writing is pretty clear. It becomes unclear because people are familiar with past editions and expect spells to operate along the same lines as in previous editions. The actual text of the spells states:        "You touch a willing creature. Until the spell ends, the target's skin has a rough, bark-like appearance, and the target's AC can't be less than 16, regardless of what kind of armor it's wearing."   There's nothing in there about granting natural armor, nothing that states that anything is added to your armor class, and nothing that says that other spells stack with it. All it does is set your minimum AC to 16. It's the equivalent of chain mail that you can use in any form, with no weight or strength minimum and no disdvantage on Stealth checks. Not great, but what do you expect for a 2nd level spell, +6 AC?
#14 Daydreamer80 Dec 01, 2014 15:37:53	I get much of what your saying colemcm.  I think i agree with your interpretation also.   Though it does make barkskin very odd indeed.   Whats the ac of someone with 20 dex and a ring of prot +1 and barkskin.  Its 16   Whats the ac of someone with 4 dex and a cursed ring of -1 ac and barkskin.   Its 16.   its the way barskin doesn't seem to interact with other bonus's that i find odd.
#15 colemcm Dec 01, 2014 15:52:08	I agree that it's odd. Kind of like how it's possible for a barbarian to be easier to hit wearing armor than if he was running around in a loincloth. We houserule that a barbarians aren't penalized for wearing armor, they just get the better of his unarmed defense or armored AC. Similarly, your group could houserule that Barkskin functions more like it did in 3rd edition, granting a +2 bonus to AC like Shield of Faith or having it set your base AC to 13 like Mage Armor. That's not how the rules say it works, but as long as your group is happy, does that matter?
(Reply to #15) Daydreamer80	colemcm wrote:
#17 Ath-kethin Dec 01, 2014 16:38:36	colemcm wrote:
#18 Daydreamer80 Dec 01, 2014 17:22:03	This is precisely my point about it not being clear.    They really should release an errata example sheet on some rules. I am inclined to lean towards the barkskin not doing anything for you to raise an Ac past 16.  But this really is one of the more ambigious spells/abilities in the game.   One piece of evidence in favor its non interaction with other properties. Pg 346 of the monsters manuel.  The druid npc has a 12 dex, which is +1.  But his armor class with barkskin is 16, not 17 .
#19 colemcm Dec 01, 2014 17:16:38	The wording "can't be less than 16" implies a minimum, not a base or modifier. There is specific wording in this edition involving effects that set a base AC (see Mage Armor or Dragon Sorcerer's Draconic Resilience) or substitute the normal formula for determining AC with a specific alternate formula (see Unarmored Defense of Barbarians and Monks). The wording of this spell makes no use of the language of either of these effects. Similarly, it makes no use of the term "Natural Armor", so there's no reason to suppose that natural armor factors into the equation in any way.   Of course it is possible to be operating under the effects of a barkskin spell and have a higher AC than 16. The spell does not imply a maximum AC for you character, only a minimum. If your normal AC, derived from any of the methods listed above, is higher than 16, you receive that AC. It doesn't make mention of what can be added to it because no part of the description implies that the spell has any effect on the standard or alternate AC calculations beyond setting a minimum score.
#20 Stormborn20 Dec 01, 2014 18:15:56	Barkskin has one of the briefest, clearest descriptions of any spell in the PHB; I think people just don't want the spell to work the way that is stated.  It seems to me that the primary uses are for a druid who wildshapes into a low AC beast and for a Ranger to cast on his low AC beast companion.
#21 Daydreamer80 Dec 01, 2014 18:42:03	Whats 'unclear' about the barkskin spell description is the AC bonus isnt modular, it doesnt have a source.   Its the only thing , far as i know, like that in the game.   But i do think that its Ac 16 minimun, or higher if you have other sources of ac-but getting no bonus from barkskin.
#22 Stormborn20 Dec 01, 2014 18:49:54	Daydreamer80 wrote:
#23 Daydreamer80 Dec 01, 2014 19:19:44	Right, somewhat mispoke.  What i mean is non technicaly if a spell raises a player character's ac its giving a bonus to there ac.  Not in game langauge specifying bonus ac as in a specific bonus like +3 bonus to ac.   The barbarian indomitable might is indeed similar.  But still evidence for it being confusing is in how many people are confused by it.  People see a number and they are looking for a source for the number, like natural armor or what have you.   I get now that the spell is 'if less than X, X.   If X or X+N.  Then it stays X or X+N'
#24 Glimjack Dec 01, 2014 23:01:41	I'm of the personally opinion that Barkskin over-writes andything that "sets" your AC to a specific value such as armour (i.e your Base AC is 16),  but anything that adds +X still applies. I know by raw this isn't the case, but I do feel that wearing a shield shouldn't influence your Barkskin to become weaker. From an in character RP perspective, I see it that the spell hardens the skin, but softens to allow mobility. For high dexterity characters the spell hardens the skin only a little allowing them to use their mobility, but for low dexterity characters who might not be as flexible, the spell hardens the skin alot as the decreased flexibility is not an issue.   Leather armour and dex 9 : AC 16 with barkskin Half-plate and dex 10: AC 16 with barkskin Half-plate and dex 14: AC 17 with barkskin (no effect)   with a shield, Shield of Faith or a Ring of Protection +2:   Leather armour and dex 9 + 2 bonus: AC 18 with barkskin Half-plate and dex 10 + 2 bonus: AC 18 with barkskin Half-plate and dex 14 + 2 bonus: AC 19 with barkskin (no effect)
#25 Sorxores Dec 02, 2014 4:50:36	PHB wrote:
#26 Timmee Dec 02, 2014 5:04:25	Glimjack wrote:
#27 justiceleaguenow Dec 03, 2014 5:28:21	I think what is missing from the discussion is that a characters effective A.C. has already been determined before the spell was ever cast!  In other words, if you are not wearing armor and have a 16 dex (+3 bonus) then your A.C. would be 13 and then you cast Barkskin so your default A.C. becomes 16 due to the spell.  If you are wearing plate and then cast Barkskin your A.C. is 18 because the spell says it can't be lower than 16 not that it can't be higher due to Armor worn or other magical effects.  So in this case the "egg" (effective A.C.) comes first and then "chicken" (Barkskin) comes next and you use whichever is the highest of the two!
#28 justiceleaguenow Dec 03, 2014 5:28:21	I think what is missing from the discussion is that a characters effective A.C. has already been determined before the spell was ever cast!  In other words, if you are not wearing armor and have a 16 dex (+3 bonus) then your A.C. would be 13 and then you cast Barkskin so your default A.C. becomes 16 due to the spell.  If you are wearing plate and then cast Barkskin your A.C. is 18 because the spell says it can't be lower than 16 not that it can't be higher due to Armor worn or other magical effects.  So in this case the "egg" (effective A.C.) comes first and then "chicken" (Barkskin) comes next and you use whichever is the highest of the two!