PDA

View Full Version : Crouching Tiger, Flying Daggers



Newt
2010-11-04, 05:00 AM
Actually none of those, but it it Monk related?

Ish.

When Armor Check Penalty (ACP) is at 0, do Monks still get speed bonuses and Wis to AC? Wis might be pushing it a bit.. But most of their abilities are noted "Can not be cast in armor or when carrying a medium to heavy load". Kinda like Wizards, but Wizards can cast with armor on when ACP is 0 or they take a few feats to get proficiency and cast in armor. Can Monks do the same thing?

Think Monk4, Rogue1, Monk of the Long Death3, Dread Commando5, Monk of the LD10. Armored death dealer, probably with an Eberron feat like Whirling Steel Strike (Use longsword as Monk weapon).

Fouredged Sword
2010-11-04, 05:21 AM
No, the armor type is all that maters. If you put on leather you loose everything just as if you put on plate.

dsmiles
2010-11-04, 05:43 AM
No, the armor type is all that maters. If you put on leather you loose everything just as if you put on plate.

That's why it's best to get a Reinforced Greatcoat from IK. Armor, but not really.

lesser_minion
2010-11-04, 06:35 AM
You might be able to convince a DM to rule it that way, but it's not how it usually works -- any armour whatsoever interferes with a monk's class features.

Fax Celestis
2010-11-04, 02:47 PM
...although paradoxically, magic items that emulate armor like bracers of armor, a wand of mage armor, or a force shield ring don't interfere with those abilities.

Quietus
2010-11-04, 02:50 PM
...although paradoxically, magic items that emulate armor like bracers of armor, a wand of mage armor, or a force shield ring don't interfere with those abilities.

Not so paradoxically, really - I believe they actually state that wearing armor of any sort slows them down and gets in the way of their movements, where all those effects are from items that provide no hinderance whatsoever. Of course, maybe I'm inserting my own fluff.

Fax Celestis
2010-11-04, 02:51 PM
A force shield ring, in particular, physically makes a shield made of force that sits over your hand, yet doesn't actually interfere with your 'no shield' abilities because it's not actually shield, just a ring that acts like one.

Dralnu
2010-11-04, 03:03 PM
A force shield ring, in particular, physically makes a shield made of force that sits over your hand, yet doesn't actually interfere with your 'no shield' abilities because it's not actually shield, just a ring that acts like one.

I always assumed that things made of force were weightless and, for all purposes in regards to movement, no hinderance whatsoever. Like Mage Armor.

Fax Celestis
2010-11-04, 03:09 PM
I always assumed that things made of force were weightless and, for all purposes in regards to movement, no hinderance whatsoever. Like Mage Armor.

It is not the weight that bothers me: it is that your fighting style changes between using a shield and not using one if you want the shield to be effective at all.

Lapak
2010-11-04, 03:14 PM
It is not the weight that bothers me: it is that your fighting style changes between using a shield and not using one if you want the shield to be effective at all.I thought that the Force Shield Ring was like using a shield. I never saw anything in the description that implied it didn't (for example) take up the hand wielding it. Turning it on and off is a free action, which opens things up a bit, but I always assumed that to use it you had to have that hand available.

EDIT: And that you DID count as wielding a shield for all purposes where that was relevant independent from ACP or spell failure.

Newt
2010-11-05, 02:29 AM
Not so paradoxically, really - I believe they actually state that wearing armor of any sort slows them down and gets in the way of their movements, where all those effects are from items that provide no hinderance whatsoever. Of course, maybe I'm inserting my own fluff.

Well that's the point, armor slows them down, but no armor check penalty armor is considered to be weightless? Hence why shadowweave leather and 2 levels of Dread Commando in theory take it down to weightless. Works for a Wizard anyway. :P

But if no armor at all, then.. Darn. Armor means no focusing on Dex for AC, so Str, Con, Wis would be fine.


If Monks are a special case then, would Improved Buckler Defense also count against them? From C Warrior, allows off hand weapon to be used with buckler. Makes slightly more sense than blocking with a punch. :P

Newt
2010-11-05, 04:11 AM
That's why it's best to get a Reinforced Greatcoat from IK. Armor, but not really.

IK?


In regards to encumbrance, Rangers only get their abilities when wearing light or no armor, yet Dread Commando and classes like it were designed to bypass those restrictions. Knight Phantom does the same thing for a Wizard, so why can't the Monk do the same thing was my question. Is there anything against weightless armor being used by the Monk? Or is it just one of those silly paradoxical things.

dsmiles
2010-11-05, 04:16 AM
IK?

The Iron Kingdoms Campaign Setting by Privateer Press.

FelixG
2010-11-05, 05:12 AM
IK?


In regards to encumbrance, Rangers only get their abilities when wearing light or no armor, yet Dread Commando and classes like it were designed to bypass those restrictions. Knight Phantom does the same thing for a Wizard, so why can't the Monk do the same thing was my question. Is there anything against weightless armor being used by the Monk? Or is it just one of those silly paradoxical things.

Monks are pretty terrible naturally, i dont think there would be any harm in allowing it really :D

Thurbane
2010-11-05, 07:34 AM
I think it's a totally reasonable houserule that if armor has ACP of 0 and isn't reducing speed, it shouldn't hamper monk abilities dependent on no armor.