PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Weightless Armor



DaltonTrigger
2009-05-14, 08:46 PM
From Bastion Press Incs' book Arms and Armor...


WEIGHTLESS: Armor given this enchantment has no weight at all. In addition to not encumbering the wearer, weightless armor reduces the armor check penalty by 5 (although not to below 0), increases the maximum Dexterity bonus by 4, and reduces the arcane spell failure percentage by 10. Additionally the move rate of the wearer is not reduced by weightless armor.
Caster Level: 7th; Prerequisites: Craft Magic Arms and Armor, levitate; Market Price: +2 bonus.

A big concern here is putting this kind of enchantment on, say, full plate. For the mere cost of a +2 enhancement, that's a HUGE increase in dexterity bonus and a HUGE decrease in armor check penalties and spell failure.On the other hand, doing this same enchantment on a suit of leather or a chain shirt shouldn't be a big deal.

Maybe this kind of change could be done. Either rule that it can ONLY apply to light armor, or rule that it counts as a +2 enhancement on light armor, but a +4 enhancement to medium armor, and a +8 enhancement to heavy armor. This is similar to how mithral significantly scales up in price from light to heavy armor.

What do you guys think of allowing weightless armor? Would you allow it in your game? Why or why not, and if you would allow weightless armor how would you rule on it?

Draken
2009-05-14, 08:51 PM
It is about as good as applying Mithril twice. While costing much, much more.

Yea, sure, stacks with Mithril. Big deal.

I wouldn't be opposed to it as it stands really.

Riffington
2009-05-14, 09:14 PM
I'd probably allow it but call it minor cheese.

It's basically like having a mithril chain shirt, you don't get your light-armor-only special abilities, you get +4 AC instead of +2 AC, and you can make it adamantine if you like. Clearly good for anyone who has no special abilities requiring light armor, but whose character concept really works better with lighter armors. Or who has no armor proficiency. Works great for anyone from warblades to cloistered clerics to druids.

Thurbane
2009-05-14, 09:17 PM
I think this enchantment is very overpowered for a +2 enhancement. I wouldn't allow it in my game...

Jack_Simth
2009-05-14, 09:19 PM
From Bastion Press Incs' book Arms and Armor...



A big concern here is putting this kind of enchantment on, say, full plate. For the mere cost of a +2 enhancement, that's a HUGE increase in dexterity bonus and a HUGE decrease in armor check penalties and spell failure.On the other hand, doing this same enchantment on a suit of leather or a chain shirt shouldn't be a big deal.

Maybe this kind of change could be done. Either rule that it can ONLY apply to light armor, or rule that it counts as a +2 enhancement on light armor, but a +4 enhancement to medium armor, and a +8 enhancement to heavy armor. This is similar to how mithral significantly scales up in price from light to heavy armor.

What do you guys think of allowing weightless armor? Would you allow it in your game? Why or why not, and if you would allow weightless armor how would you rule on it?

Let's see... what's the worst case scenario? 1+ Twilight Weightless Mithral Feycraft Fullplate:
Costs:
Base Fullplate: 1,500 gp
Mithral: 9,000 (1 category lighter, -10% ASF, Max Dex +2, ACP reduced by 3, divide weight by 2)
Feycraft: 500 gp (10% less weight, -5% ASF, hardness -1, HP -5)
Twilight: +1 Equivalent (-10% spell failure; PHB II)
Weightless: +2 Equivalent (Reduce ACP by 5, Max Dex +4, ASF -10%, weight = 0)
Required Enhancement: +1 Equivalent
Final Cost: 27,000 gp

Base Fullplate:
Final:
+9 Armor, +7 Max Dex, 0 ACP, 0% ASF, 0 lbs; Hardness: 16 (15 base Mithril, -1 Feycraft, +2 for the +1 Enhancement), Hit Points: 45 (40 base, -5 Feycraft, +10 for the +1 Enhancement)

Compare to +8 Bracers of Armor:
+8 Armor, +All Max Dex, - ACP, 0% ASF, 1 pound, 64,000 gp - but works against incorporeal touch attacks, too.

Let's make the breastplate apply to incorporeal touch by way of the Ghost Touch special ability (+3 Equivalent, bringing the cost of enchantments from 16k for +4 Equivalent to +7 Equivalent, a change of 33,000 gp):
Final Cost: 60,000 gp - which is just barely under the cost of Bracers of Armor +8, which gives you less AC ... but then, the Bracers don't interfere with any class features (such as a Monk's Wis to AC, or the Druid's spellcasting), the Fullplate does. The Bracers have no cap to max Dex, the Fullplate does (+7, which is pretty hard to reach unless you're really up in levels, or you've got a dedicated rogue). We can further enchant the armor without getting into Epic limits (by +3), we can't do so with the Bracers (they're at their cap - if we ignore the Epic *10 cost, bracers +9 for the same armor value would cost 81,000 gp, market).

Short answer:
Yes, it's stronger than Bracers of Armor. Exceptionally so, if you don't worry about incorporeal touch attacks.

Edit:
The above assumes you want to be a Fullplate Wizard with no ASF. If you're not worried about ASF (maybe you're a Cleric, or you're a Paladin that rolled all 18's or something) then the worst case scenario is a bit worse:

Base Fullplate: 1,500 gp
Mithral: 9,000 (1 category lighter, -10% ASF, Max Dex +2, ACP reduced by 3, divide weight by 2)
Weightless: +2 Equivalent (Reduce ACP by 5, Max Dex +4, ASF -10%, weight = 0)
Required Enhancement: +1 Equivalent
Final Cost: 19,500 gp
Final Result: +9 Armor, +7 Max Dex, 0 ACP, 15% ASF, 0 lbs; Hardness: 17 (15 base Mithril, +2 for the +1 Enhancement), Hit Points: 50 (40 base, +10 for the +1 Enhancement)

If we add Ghost Touch to that, it goes from +3 Equivalent to +6 Equivalent, raising the cost by 27,000 gp, to 46,500 gp.

DaltonTrigger
2009-05-14, 09:25 PM
I agree that it is too much, at least when it comes to heavy armor. It wouldn't be such a huge deal on light armor (Sure mithril chain shirt with this enchantment would be better than padded armor with +2 but big deal). The problem comes when it gets suck on full plate.

Now you have armor that should weight 50 pounds weighing nothing, not causing you to move 20', giving you an armor check penalty of only -1 and a max dex bonus of 5.

Combine that with mithril and now your max dex bonus is 7, no armor check penalty. All for the price of Mithril Plate +2. A dex-build fighter's or rogue's AC would be pretty pimpin' at this point.

Edit: Jack beat me to it. And very very effectively, I might add.

Faulty
2009-05-14, 09:31 PM
That's a bit extreme. In Underdark there's an enhancement called Halfweight which makes the armor count as light and reduces weight by half and that's a +3, reduced to +2 if it's on Illithidwrought armor (which is +2). So, compared to official D&D, it's overpowered.

Underdark also has Heavy Plate, which is +9 armor, +0 max dex, which would make the Weightless enchantment worse.

DaltonTrigger
2009-05-14, 09:36 PM
So we're back to square one. Would allowing this enchantment only on light armor balance it? Or scaling the equivalent enhancement cost if you intend to use it on something that's not light?

Faulty
2009-05-14, 09:40 PM
Make it a +1 enhancement on light armor, +2 on medium and +4 on heavy or something.

herrhauptmann
2009-05-15, 01:45 AM
WEIGHTLESS: Armor given this enchantment has no weight at all. In addition to not encumbering the wearer, weightless armor reduces the armor check penalty by 5 (although not to below 0), increases the maximum Dexterity bonus by 4, and reduces the arcane spell failure percentage by 10. Additionally the move rate of the wearer is not reduced by weightless armor.
Caster Level: 7th; Prerequisites: Craft Magic Arms and Armor, levitate; Market Price: +2 bonus.


Making it only work on light armor would be a good balance.

Or the scaling enhancements depending on light/medium/heavy. Though I think that in that case, you count a mithral breastplate as medium, mithral full plate as heavy.

Or: change how much it affects Max Dex, ACP and ASF. I think those numbers as given are way to high. Because even if your full plate is now literally light as a feather, it's still frickin full plate. You still can't move with your full agility because the armor is still getting in your way (It's metal, it doesn't bend!) Perhaps: Change ACP by 2, max Dex by 2, and ASF not at all. Depending on how you think of it, ASF is your armor affecting the mystic energies that surround you as you control your magic. Or ASF is just your armor making it hard to move your hands/arms in the required gestures to cast.

Myrmex
2009-05-15, 02:21 AM
I like it. In level 10+ games, getting boosts to ability scores is cheap and easy, which makes full plate less attractive. Which means that the guy who should have the AC of a battlecruiser is actually easier to hit than the old dude with a pointy hat.

icefractal
2009-05-15, 03:18 AM
It's pointless on light armor, even at +1. A mithral shirt costs only 1,100 and is already as good as this. I guess if it was only +1 it might be worth stacking with mithral for arcane casters (gives you higher max-Dex than Twilight would). Definitely never worth it at +2, or for anyone without ASF.

On medium armor, it would be worth it at +1. Not at +2 though, especially compared to, again, a Mithral Shirt.

On heavy armor, it suddenly becomes good. Is it too good though? That's hard to say:
+3 Mithral Breastplate: 8 AC, 5 MD, 0 ACP
+1 Weightless Fullplate: 9 AC, 5 MD, 0 ACP
It's one point of potential AC above the breastplate. Of course, the breastplate is ready for greater armor crystals, which is a potential advantage. So maybe it could be +3, but it's not that bad at +2. I certainly wouldn't go above +3.

So in summary: +1 for light and medium armor, +3 for heavy armor, and that's conservative.

Baalthazaq
2009-05-15, 03:19 AM
I think it's fine the way it is. The worst case scenarios aren't looking that bad to me. You've forgotten to include enhancement bonuses later.

This armor is strong in mid levels sure, but later on? when you want to start adding those +4 extra enhancement bonus onto it, you're looking at a +10 item instead of +8. Which to me seems fine.

If you want to arbitrarily compare it to random stuff, compare it to Defending items.

Shield, Armor, weapon.

Heavy Metal Shield +5, with shield spike +5 defending.
Weapon of defending +5.
+ 5 mithril full plate with armor spikes +5 defending.
Ring of protection +5.
Amulet of Natural Armor +5.

That totals at: 10+7+5+5+5+8+5+3+5 = AC 58, with 15 of it coming from defending (untyped bonuses ftw).
A defending weapon allows the wielder to transfer some or all of the sword’s enhancement bonus to his AC as a bonus that stacks with all others. As a free action, the wielder chooses how to allocate the weapon’s enhancement bonus at the start of his turn before using the weapon, and the effect to AC lasts until his next turn.

Riffington
2009-05-15, 04:43 AM
Heavy Metal Shield +5, with shield spike +5 defending.
Weapon of defending +5.
+ 5 mithril full plate with armor spikes +5 defending.


On turns that you full attack and make at least 3 of those attacks with useless weapons.

Fcannon
2009-05-15, 04:43 AM
Complete Psionic has the Skin of Ectoplasmic Armor, which covers you in very lightweight (1 lb) full plate. It gives you +2 maximum dex bonus, 25% ASF, the regular -6 ACP, and no speed penalty. I'd have the enchantment give those benefits to regular armor instead of the benefits in the opening post.

Typewriter
2009-05-15, 08:50 AM
I kind of disagree with the fact thought that it should be light armor only.

Honestly, a rogue getting the same benefit of this enchantment on his padded leather that weights 10 pounds as the fighter who gets it on his 50 pound fullplate?

I wouldn't allow a player to get it on his own, but I have dished out similar things as quest/loot rewards. What I've used is more powerful than this even, but being a custom made magic item(and really, anything from third party is effectively custom made), you don't really have to follow all the rules.

Baalthazaq
2009-05-15, 09:08 AM
On turns that you full attack and make at least 3 of those attacks with useless weapons.

2 of the weapons are "unused" except for defense. You take no penalties here. They are just attached to armor you already have. Either way, it's usually my cleric builds that do this.

Riffington
2009-05-15, 09:28 AM
2 of the weapons are "unused" except for defense. You take no penalties here. They are just attached to armor you already have. Either way, it's usually my cleric builds that do this.

"As a free action, the wielder chooses how to allocate the weapon’s enhancement bonus at the start of his turn before using the weapon, and the effect to AC lasts until his next turn."

Faulty
2009-05-15, 09:51 AM
I think it's fine the way it is. The worst case scenarios aren't looking that bad to me. You've forgotten to include enhancement bonuses later.

This armor is strong in mid levels sure, but later on? when you want to start adding those +4 extra enhancement bonus onto it, you're looking at a +10 item instead of +8. Which to me seems fine.

If you want to arbitrarily compare it to random stuff, compare it to Defending items.

Shield, Armor, weapon.

Heavy Metal Shield +5, with shield spike +5 defending.
Weapon of defending +5.
+ 5 mithril full plate with armor spikes +5 defending.
Ring of protection +5.
Amulet of Natural Armor +5.

That totals at: 10+7+5+5+5+8+5+3+5 = AC 58, with 15 of it coming from defending (untyped bonuses ftw).

You have to attack with a defending weapon to gain the benefit.

Baalthazaq
2009-05-25, 08:04 AM
Says who? "Before using the weapon" does not suggest you need to actually attack.

"Look both sides before you cross the street". It is perfectly reasonable to not cross the street after looking both ways. You do not see a car and just go "Oh crap, now I need to fling myself into the path of oncoming traffic".

It seems to me the reason for putting that in was to specifically stop people hitting with a +5 weapon, then reducing it to +0 after the attacks as a free action.

The SRD says nothing which suggests attacking is required.

If it does:
Only characters that can cast spells can sleep: "If the character does not need to sleep for some reason, she still must have 8 hours of restful calm before preparing any spells"

You must prepare spells, or you have had no sleep.

Some other fun stuff:

Magic Circle automatically fails if the creature does not act, because it must be cast "before the creature acts". No act, no cast.

Taking 20 on a skill check takes 0 time, because you never perform the action. Why? "Taking 20 means you are trying until you get it right, and it assumes that you fail many times before succeeding". If you cannot succeed, therefore you cannot take 20.

Elves "try to retreat before they are discovered". Hear that? They cannot retreat unless they know they are going to be found.

Do you take anything other than Thaumaturgist when you're a caster? "If a character had more than one spellcasting class before he became a thaumaturgist".

Before almost universally suggests it is possible to not perform the action, as you have made the decision to do X, before making the decision to do Y. It then makes sense you can do X alone.

Curmudgeon
2009-05-25, 08:16 AM
Heavy Metal Shield +5, with shield spike +5 defending.
Weapon of defending +5.
+ 5 mithril full plate with armor spikes +5 defending.
Ring of protection +5.

AC 58, with 15 of it coming from defending (untyped bonuses ftw).
A defending weapon allows the wielder to transfer some or all of the sword’s enhancement bonus to his AC as a bonus that stacks with all others. As a free action, the wielder chooses how to allocate the weapon’s enhancement bonus at the start of his turn before using the weapon, and the effect to AC lasts until his next turn. Pay attention. The bonus only stacks with all others if it's on a sword.

Does this make sense? Not really. But it's RAW. And by RAW, this bonus doesn't stack with all others if it's not on a sword. Normally bonuses from different types stack, but this one explicitly states that it must be on a sword to stack.

Baalthazaq
2009-05-25, 11:04 AM
Pay attention. The bonus only stacks with all others if it's on a sword.

Does this make sense? Not really. But it's RAW. And by RAW, this bonus doesn't stack with all others if it's not on a sword. Normally bonuses from different types stack, but this one explicitly states that it must be on a sword to stack.

Actually still not true. There's a weak argument for your interpretation, but a strong argument that by RAW, defending only works on swords all together. Not that it only stacks with a sword.

I say a weak argument, because either way it could still be argued otherwise that the bonuses are untyped when transferring to AC. The AC bonus it becomes is not discussed, though it could be interpreted as enhancement. Or not.

RavKal
2009-05-25, 11:20 AM
Am I the only person who read this and thought the real problem would be the armor floating away after you take it off? :smallwink:

Baalthazaq
2009-05-25, 11:31 AM
Am I the only person who read this and thought the real problem would be the armor floating away after you take it off? :smallwink:

Heh, no. There's a character in my wife's game that is effectively weightless. The argument for why he stays grounded is "his clothes keep him down, plus his fly speed means he has some level of control".

My character with a 24 STR, could easily smack him unconscious, and throw him far far far far away in this armor. :)

shadzar
2009-05-25, 11:58 AM
I have had weightless armor of all types before. The thing is that for the full-plate you may be looking for something else than just an enchantment. Another type of armor that provides the same strengths, but less weight to it.

I recall something of old that was called a God Suit. You won't find it in 3.5 because I think it was for Blackmoor shadow elves long ago and didn't make it into the newest Blackmoor stuff. It was in a list of alien devices along with other things like a magical phonograph.

Anyway, there is nothing to say this could not be used in a way that doesn't remove all the problems of the armor.

It can be a +2 advantage without being a +2 to AC. Meaning it would require something able to dispel +2 bonus to remove the enchantment. So while full-plate may lose its weight, it doesn't really affect anything else, so wouldn't be that big of a concern. It would definitely have a higher price, and then later selling it off may not yield any good results since others may see such armor as not really anything other than a toy since it is so light.

There are plenty of ways to add disadvantage back so that full-plate doesn't lose all its negatives and becomes something for everyone. Cost alone not being the only one. Weight still does not infer greater flexibility of motion for full-plate that other armors could provide for certain classes, so could still be restricted to those classes and apply those negatives while just being easier on the back to wear.

I think maybe the implication in the OP from that book was poorly done.