PDA

View Full Version : Monk 1/Cleric X: Obviously a good idea?



Freelance Henchman
2007-11-05, 09:25 AM
These two classes seem made to be taken together, at least in the 1-level-monk-dip form to get Wisdom AC. That all clerics are able to wear any armor does seem a little odd since it's the same for the God of Love as well as the Reaver of Souls or whatever. But being able to use Wisdom, the Cleric's primary stat, both for his spells and for AC seems to make sense RP-wise (divine protection) as well as be mechanically nice. Maybe it would make sense to take away the armor (and shield?) proficiencies and give Clerics the choice to take Wisdom AC as a feat?

Have you played this?

kpenguin
2007-11-05, 09:30 AM
You loose one caster level. You need to ask yourself whether its worth that loss.

Freelance Henchman
2007-11-05, 09:35 AM
You loose one caster level. You need to ask yourself whether its worth that loss.

Maybe Practiced Spellcaster would at least mitigate that? Clerics seem otherwise damned to wear armor.

Valairn
2007-11-05, 09:39 AM
Well regardless of any fluff disagreement with the mechanics of the class, a 1 level dip into monk isn't really worth it. All you get out of it, is a bonus to armor class when you aren't wearing armor, well, that's like what +4 ac if you have an 18 wis? Personally I think 1 caster level is better than a mediocre AC bonus, that isn't better than wearing armor.

If you really want to play a cleric that doesn't wear armor. I think the Cloistered Cleric variant in the Unearthed Arcana is the class for you.

Also practiced spellcaster only increases your caster level, it does not make up for spells lost due to not taking a level in that class.

Keld Denar
2007-11-05, 09:39 AM
Not only that, but you lose an enchantment slot. Armor is a huge slot for adding on useful buffs. Death Ward, Energy Immunity, Fortification, and a few other slots are AMAZING. If you don't wear armor, you can't benefit from them. You can also cast Magic Vestiment on them. At CL 20, Full Plate with a +5 MV on them is a 13 point AC gain, not counting all of the other non-AC buffs you put on them. In order to get this from the monk level, you would need a 36 wisdom. Thats impossible in most games. Even with Bracers of Armor +8 (way more expensive) and Magic Vestiments on your t-shirt, you still lack all of the neat enhancements that you would normally gain from armor. Also, Monk AC bonus says you can't use a shield, not even an animated one. An Animated Shield is 9000g, and with MV+5 provides another +7 AC that the monk could not get.

Plus, as the above pointed out, you lose a caster level, which breaks rule #1 of full casters. (THOU SHALT NOT LOSE CASTER LEVELS)

Valairn
2007-11-05, 09:42 AM
Sacrifcing caster levels if fine, if you get a benefit that equals the sacrfice, a level in monk < caster level. In fact taking the monk class as it is in the core books is pretty much a bad decision all around.

Xuincherguixe
2007-11-05, 09:45 AM
Maybe go for the Sacred Fist Prestige Class? Though you would lose at least 2 caster levels. I think you can even meet the requirements with no monk levels. Works for druids too.

Freelance Henchman
2007-11-05, 09:51 AM
Maybe go for the Sacred Fist Prestige Class? Though you would lose at least 2 caster levels. I think you can even meet the requirements with no monk levels. Works for druids too.

They seem to have to go unarmed as well. I just wanted the unarmored aspect, not the kung-fu fighting aspect.

Keld Denar
2007-11-05, 10:11 AM
They seem to have to go unarmed as well. I just wanted the unarmored aspect, not the kung-fu fighting aspect.

Unarmored is the weakest path to take. Almost everyone should be armored after a certain point (at least a mith buckler or animated shield, if not twilight mith chain shirt or mith breastplate/fullplate). The ability to enchant armor is pretty much critical at high levels, because so many things are going to crush you without it. If you are fighting most things your CR, you need the ability to cast MV twice on each character. You need to have enhancement bonuses such as Death Ward and Energy Immunity. When most high CR things are throwing out death effects or 70 point AoE energy damage on a per round basis, those buffs make the difference between living and 10,000 gp in diamond dust. The proper buffs can swing a characters AC by almost 20 points, making hitting difficult and warding off power attacks. Most of those buffs rely on having at least base armor and a shield to enchant, though.

Just some words of advice. YMMV

Kurald Galain
2007-11-05, 10:16 AM
If you are fighting most things your CR, you need the ability to cast MV twice on each character.

While I certainly agree that going armored is a very good idea, I'm reasonably sure that Magic Vestment does not stack with itself. Not even if one is on the armor and the other is on clothing.

Keld Denar
2007-11-05, 10:22 AM
While I certainly agree that going armored is a very good idea, I'm reasonably sure that Magic Vestment does not stack with itself. Not even if one is on the armor and the other is on clothing.

Partially true. MV specifically says that it affects clothing worn, in the case of an unarmored individual. When it does so, it does NOT stack with MV cast on armor worn over those clothes since they both provide Armor bonuses to AC.

It DOES stack with itself when cast upon a shield held by a character wearing armor with MV cast on it. Since the enhancement bonus on the shield is providing a Shield bonus to AC, and the enhancement bonus on the armor is providing an Armor bonus to AC, they stack.

That why you want to have armor and a shield (mithril buckler, animated shield, or otherwise), which a Cleric with a Monk level could not do.

This (among other things) is one of the reasons why Monks are generally considered the weakest of all core classes. They lack vital defense required at high levels, and their mediocre class ability doesn't make up for what they lose.

mostlyharmful
2007-11-05, 10:26 AM
While I certainly agree that going armored is a very good idea, I'm reasonably sure that Magic Vestment does not stack with itself. Not even if one is on the armor and the other is on clothing.

But if you're fighting things of your CR then providing for the possibility of a successful dispel early in the day isn't unreasonable. Even so I'd just get a scroll of it since it'd be relatively rare if you boost your caster level.

Kurald Galain
2007-11-05, 10:31 AM
It DOES stack with itself when cast upon a shield held by a character wearing armor with MV cast on it.

Um, no, Magic Vestment is an enhancement bonus - not an armor bonus or a shield bonus.

Azerian Kelimon
2007-11-05, 10:32 AM
Monk and Cleric is not worth it. It simply is ineffective. I'm very sure there was a feat that gave you Wis to AC, and if I'm correct, and you're hellbent on Wis to AC without feats, a Monk's belt gives it to you without sacrificing a level.

Freelance Henchman
2007-11-05, 10:32 AM
That why you want to have armor and a shield (mithril buckler, animated shield, or otherwise), which a Cleric with a Monk level could not do.

Hm. Not very good then. I suppose robe-wearing shield-less Wizards at least have Mirror Image and stuff to avoid damage, which clerics don't get. But then, (pure) Wizards stay out of melee.

Keld Denar
2007-11-05, 10:39 AM
By the time a cleric is dropping MV+5s he'll be able to skyrocket his caster level with minimum investment. Orange Ioun Stone, Bead of Karma, Divine Spell Power, and a Ring of Enduring Arcana (which can be swapped out after the buff suite is up) can throw a Cleric's buff CL into the low 30s, making them impossible to dispel because of the fact that GDM caps out at +15. The only other way to dispel would be MD, which most players and DMs ban outright.

Even at lower levels, a level 13 cleric can get his CL pretty high for the party daily buffage to the point where nothing CR appropriate will be able to dispel.

CL 13
+1 Orange Ioun Stone
+4 Bead of Karma
+4 Divine Spell Power
+2 Hymn of Praise (party bard)
+2 (some of the bard spell) (same bard)

That's CL 26, or CL 30 vs dispel with the Ring of Enduring Arcana. NOTHING that is an approriate challenge for an level 13 group can hit a level 30 dispel. Or at least, nothing that I know of.

Sir Enigma
2007-11-05, 10:40 AM
Um, no, Magic Vestment is an enhancement bonus - not an armor bonus or a shield bonus.

But it's an enhancement bonus to the armor or shield, not to your armor class.


You imbue a suit of armor or a shield with an enhancement bonus of +1 per four caster levels (maximum +5 at 20th level).

It's the same reason as why you can benefit from a +1 shield and +1 armor at the same time - the enhancement bonus enhances the armor or shield bonus, not your own AC, so they do in fact stack.

Keld Denar
2007-11-05, 10:43 AM
Um, no, Magic Vestment is an enhancement bonus - not an armor bonus or a shield bonus.

By your logic, a +1 large shield and a +1 suit of full plate would net AC:
8+2+1 = +11

This is false.

The correct addition would be:
8+2+1+1 = +12 or 9+3 = +12 to be exact

The two enhancement bonuses are to different types of AC (one shield, one armor), which explicitly do stack. MV just changes the value of the enhancement bonus to each (similar to GMW). Take a look at the section in the DMG about magical armor and enhancement bonuses for proof.

(posting from work, and SRD is blocked....grrrrr)

EDIT: SIMU-NINJAED

Douglas
2007-11-05, 10:43 AM
Um, no, Magic Vestment is an enhancement bonus - not an armor bonus or a shield bonus.
Cast on armor, it is an enhancement bonus to armor. Cast on a shield, it is an enhancement bonus to the shield. They do not directly affect the same thing, so they stack. This is exactly the same reason as why a +1 suit of armor stacks with a +1 shield. If Magic Vestment did not stack in this way, consistency would require that one or the other of the enhancement bonuses on those two items be redundant.

With a sufficiently high wisdom, Magic Vestment on clothing plus wisdom to AC can be better than armor and shield with MV on both, but your wisdom has to be pretty high to reach that point. It helps if dexterity is also high. However, at that point you're probably high level and wealthy enough you can just follow the example of the one character I've had that got his wisdom that high and buy or make a Monk's Belt.

Kurald Galain
2007-11-05, 10:51 AM
This is getting weird.

Yes, a magic shield stacks with a magical armor; this is specifically stated in the SRD. However, the SRD also says that bonuses with the same name don't stack (with a bunch of exceptions), and that "Spells that provide bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes usually do not stack with themselves". I'm rather surprised that MV can be cast on a shield in the first place (it can, by SRD) because a shield is not a vestment. "Giving a bonus to the armor" is a silly phrasing. The bonus is to your AC, obviously, not to some object.

So I suppose this is one of those "DM's call, or spend an hour bickering over the rules" issues.

Keld Denar
2007-11-05, 10:55 AM
With a sufficiently high wisdom, Magic Vestment on clothing plus wisdom to AC can be better than armor and shield with MV on both, but your wisdom has to be pretty high to reach that point. It helps if dexterity is also high. However, at that point you're probably high level and wealthy enough you can just follow the example of the one character I've had that got his wisdom that high and buy or make a Monk's Belt.

Douglas, as I pointed out, the major concern is that you lose out on an item to enchant by not having a shield and armor. You would have to have an wisdom bonus of (8 full plate, 2 shield, 5 MV on shield) +15 to make up for full plate and shield. That a wisdom of 40. You also get a couple points of DEX with mith full plate, but you could offset that high WIS with a high DEX, but now you are getting even more MAD than usual.

Also, a monks belt is a bad buy MOST of the time. A better buy would be a Belt of Dwarvenkind for +2 CON (since Clerics have to wear a +6 WIS neck and can't get a +6 CON neck) or a Belt of Battle (MIC) which buys a Cleric extra rounds to pop off a buff suite. (DP + RM or similar)

Toliudar
2007-11-05, 11:27 AM
I've found monk's belts very cost-effective for mid-level cloistered clerics/theurges etc. With a Monk's belt and Magic Vestment, a character with Wisdom 20 and 9th level casting gets 6+3= 9 to AC, without wearing armour. All for 13,000 and one slot. To get the same with light armour would cost more, and involve more slots. Plus, at higher levels, you retain the option to have the armour slot open for robes.

Keld Denar
2007-11-05, 11:42 AM
I've found monk's belts very cost-effective for mid-level cloistered clerics/theurges etc. With a Monk's belt and Magic Vestment, a character with Wisdom 20 and 9th level casting gets 6+3= 9 to AC, without wearing armour. All for 13,000 and one slot. To get the same with light armour would cost more, and involve more slots. Plus, at higher levels, you retain the option to have the armour slot open for robes.

The same character could wear a +1 twilight mithril chain shirt (+5, 0% ASF) with MV, a +1 mith buckler (0% ASF) with MV and get MORE AC at the cost of about 5k for the shirt, and 2k for the shield. 7k < 13k.

If the character didn't care about ASF (cloistered cleric), he/she could get +1 mith BP with Death Ward for about 8k, and a mith buckler with Energy Immunity for about 5k = 13k for the belt, get MORE AC (+10) out of it than the belt, and have 2 life saving effects useable once per day each. This is WAY more useful than a Monks Belt, plus, the belt slot is free for the above mentioned Belt of Dwarvenkind or Belt of Battle.

Also, Robe slots are worthless. Unless you get a Robe of the Archmage (major magic item) there are no good robes, or at least not that compare to armor.

EDIT: WIS 20 (+5) and a CL9 MV (+2) is only AC +7. Sorry.

Fax Celestis
2007-11-05, 11:44 AM
Um, no, Magic Vestment is an enhancement bonus - not an armor bonus or a shield bonus.

Magic vestment provides an enhancement bonus to either your armor's armor class or your shield's armor class, thereby increasing the individual pieces to your overall Armor Class. If it specified you were able to use it on natural armor too, it'd provide an enhancement bonus to your natural armor class, which would also stack into your overall Armor Class.

Reinboom
2007-11-05, 11:47 AM
Riding with this idea, a 1 level dip into monk before entering druid (instead of cleric) would be more powerful. Albeit, you wouldn't want to really do that either.

That, and druids eventually can get owl's insight (from the spell compendium) - making them a stronger primary wisdom class.

Toliudar
2007-11-05, 12:03 PM
The same character could wear a +1 twilight mithril chain shirt (+5, 0% ASF) with MV, a +1 mith buckler (0% ASF) with MV and get MORE AC at the cost of about 5k for the shirt, and 2k for the shield. 7k < 13k.

If the character didn't care about ASF (cloistered cleric), he/she could get +1 mith BP with Death Ward for about 8k, and a mith buckler with Energy Immunity for about 5k = 13k for the belt, get MORE AC (+10) out of it than the belt, and have 2 life saving effects useable once per day each. This is WAY more useful than a Monks Belt, plus, the belt slot is free for the above mentioned Belt of Dwarvenkind or Belt of Battle.

Also, Robe slots are worthless. Unless you get a Robe of the Archmage (major magic item) there are no good robes, or at least not that compare to armor.

EDIT: WIS 20 (+5) and a CL9 MV (+2) is only AC +7. Sorry.

Mea culpa on the Magic Vestment (I'd thought it was +1/3 levels, not +1/4 levels), although the monk's belt would give +6 to AC. +8 with Owl's Wisdom. I also love for my full casters to not have to wear weaponry - and with the monk's belt, you've at least got an unarmed strike, and the ability to be considered armed.

And as a fan of both the abovementioned Robe of the Archmagi and the Robe of Eyes, I do sometimes like the robe slot free.

YMMV.

Fax Celestis
2007-11-05, 12:08 PM
Riding with this idea, a 1 level dip into monk before entering druid (instead of cleric) would be more powerful. Albeit, you wouldn't want to really do that either.

That, and druids eventually can get owl's insight (from the spell compendium) - making them a stronger primary wisdom class.

There's always the Hunter druid variant. Or the Force of Nature druid variant collection.

Freelance Henchman
2007-11-05, 12:09 PM
It sounds like at least the ability to use a (light) shield to go together with Monk AC would at least remedy the lacking total AC. But the lack of enchantment on the robe remains a problem. Hm.

Keld Denar
2007-11-05, 12:21 PM
It sounds like at least the ability to use a (light) shield to go together with Monk AC would at least remedy the lacking total AC. But the lack of enchantment on the robe remains a problem. Hm.

Except that it explicitly says you can not use a shield AND gain a monks bonus to AC. Otherwise every monk and their mother would use a shield. That rules out a monks belt with a shield. You can't even use a Ring of Force Shielding, since you are technically still "wielding" a shield, and therefore losing your monk AC bonus.

BadJuJu
2007-11-05, 12:24 PM
They seem to have to go unarmed as well. I just wanted the unarmored aspect, not the kung-fu fighting aspect.

If you just want the wisdom to ac, look into swordsage from ToB. 2nd level you get it and martial manuvers are not a bad thing.

Jasdoif
2007-11-05, 12:29 PM
If all you want is Wisdom to AC, just get a Monk's Belt. That way you don't have to slow your caster progression.

OneWinged4ngel
2007-11-05, 08:49 PM
These two classes seem made to be taken together, at least in the 1-level-monk-dip form to get Wisdom AC. That all clerics are able to wear any armor does seem a little odd since it's the same for the God of Love as well as the Reaver of Souls or whatever. But being able to use Wisdom, the Cleric's primary stat, both for his spells and for AC seems to make sense RP-wise (divine protection) as well as be mechanically nice. Maybe it would make sense to take away the armor (and shield?) proficiencies and give Clerics the choice to take Wisdom AC as a feat?

Have you played this?

Wait wait wait. You're asking whether or not losing a caster level to get Wisdom to AC in place of great armor?

No. From an optimization standpoint, this is not a good idea. Get a Monk's Belt or something.

If you just don't want your cleric to wear heavy armor, there are options. There's the UA Cloistered Cleric, for example.

deadseashoals
2007-11-05, 10:04 PM
This is getting weird.

Yes, a magic shield stacks with a magical armor; this is specifically stated in the SRD. However, the SRD also says that bonuses with the same name don't stack (with a bunch of exceptions), and that "Spells that provide bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes usually do not stack with themselves". I'm rather surprised that MV can be cast on a shield in the first place (it can, by SRD) because a shield is not a vestment. "Giving a bonus to the armor" is a silly phrasing. The bonus is to your AC, obviously, not to some object.

So I suppose this is one of those "DM's call, or spend an hour bickering over the rules" issues.

It's not weird, and it's not ambiguous. Magic vestment is a spell that applies a bonus to your ITEM. It makes it a better item. The bonuses apply to the items. Not to you. That's how they "stack." Ruling otherwise is a house rule.

Temp
2007-11-05, 11:59 PM
Wait wait wait. You're asking whether or not losing a caster level to get Wisdom to AC in place of great armor?I think the answer to that question is "no."

That does sound like too strong of a change/feat option. The Cleric class is powerful enough as-is, it doesn't need any boosts.

Actually, just about every Wisdom-based class (the Monk aside) is pretty well off already; the game doesn't need any more Wisdom synergies.

Kizara
2007-11-06, 12:42 AM
No, but its nice if you want to be a druid.

Wilding clasps are irritating to find and expensive, so having a nice bonus to your AC while you are running around in fleshraker form is great.

At mid-high levels, your Wis can get quite high:

18 + 2 (level bonuses ) + 6 item = 26. That's before tomes of +Wis, other non-encantment effects that boost it (and trust me, if you look hard enough they are out there) or playing a race with a wisdom bonus.

Kurald Galain
2007-11-06, 05:25 AM
It's not weird, and it's not ambiguous. Magic vestment is a spell that applies a bonus to your ITEM. It makes it a better item. The bonuses apply to the items. Not to you. That's how they "stack." Ruling otherwise is a house rule.

Once you start arguing that bonuses are put on an item rather than on the number that they actually apply to, you are rules lawyering (whether you are "correct" or not). Things that can be reasonably interpreted in multiple ways from the ruleset, such as this (q.v. the parts I quoted earlier) are a source of argument, or a DM's call.

Dode
2007-11-06, 05:28 AM
No thanks I'd rather just wear full plate and enjoy the AC equivalent of Wis 24 at level 1.

Freelance Henchman
2007-11-06, 05:33 AM
No thanks I'd rather just wear full plate and enjoy the AC equivalent of Wis 24 at level 1.

Yes, I KNOW that wearing full plate armor is teh rulzors protectionwise. I'm just wondering why the God of Knitting and Weaving wants his followers running around in tin suits. As an alternative, he might just provide a divine protection that is similar to the Monk's wisdom AC.

Dode
2007-11-06, 05:35 AM
Because the God of Knitting and Weaving doesn't want his followers to die?

Zincorium
2007-11-06, 05:38 AM
Once you start arguing that bonuses are put on an item rather than on the number that they actually apply to, you are rules lawyering (whether you are "correct" or not). Things that can be reasonably interpreted in multiple ways from the ruleset, such as this (q.v. the parts I quoted earlier) are a source of argument, or a DM's call.

So the options are 'rules lawyering' or not understanding the game? That seems like an antagonistic way of viewing it.

To put it very simply, 'magic vestment' is the AC version of magic weapon. It adds enhancement bonuses, which are exactly the same as the bonuses on magical armor or shields. As an enhancement bonus only increases an existing bonus, there is no reason to misconstrue it's effects.

You're increasing your shield bonus and armor bonus to AC individually with the same spell. Since the shield bonus and armor bonus normally stack, they still do even when enhanced.

Kurald Galain
2007-11-06, 06:14 AM
The point is that I can just as easily argue that you are the one not understanding this, citing different parts of the very same rule book.

Irreverent Fool
2007-11-06, 06:25 AM
Once you start arguing that bonuses are put on an item rather than on the number that they actually apply to, you are rules lawyering (whether you are "correct" or not). Things that can be reasonably interpreted in multiple ways from the ruleset, such as this (q.v. the parts I quoted earlier) are a source of argument, or a DM's call.

Magic Vestment reads:


You imbue a suit of armor or a shield with an enhancement bonus of +1 per four caster levels (maximum +5 at 20th level).


Shields
Shield enhancement bonuses stack with armor enhancement bonuses.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicArmor.htm

I hope this settles the dispute. This is the way it is intended, written, and has been in the various incarnations of D&D over the ages. Now, let's get this thread back on the rails!

Someone mentioned taking 'practiced spellcaster' to mitigate the loss of the caster level from taking a level of monk. I want to point out that when people talk about 'losing caster levels' -- especially in regard to full casters -- they usually mean 'losing a level of spell progression' which is really something else.

Even if you had an obscenely high wisdom for some reason, I can't see it being at all worth it from an optimization standpoint. Say you've got a race with no LA and a +4 Wisdom bonus. That's 22 wis at level 1. You get a +5 over the course of 20 levels and can have a +5 from inherent bonuses. I believe the best you can hope for from items is a +6. That gives you a Wisdom of 38 for a modifier of +14. +14 AC you say? Not too shabby. Imagine that somehow you have a 33 Dexterity (assuming 22 to start +5 inherent and +6 from items) for another +11 and you're looking at +25 AC

Now, let's say you've managed to get a +1 dexterity modifier. You wear full plate which grants a +8. You're currently at +9. Make that full plate +5 and look! You've got +14 AC. You haven't even put on your shield yet.

Grab a heavy steel shield +5 and you've got another +7. That pushes you up to +21 AC total. True, you're 4 points shy of that +25, but you're also missing out on all the spells that can go onto armor and shields.

Also, let's face it: A race that grants +4 Wisdom and +4 Dexterity isn't out there (at least not without an LA). And a cleric has spells available to push his AC higher with sacred bonuses and the like.

This doesn't address the fact that in the middle times you will be lagging behind if you go the way of the monk because by the time you can afford a simple suit of full plate, the combination of your wisdom and dexterity probably won't make up the difference. Also, you'll be suffering along with a lost level of spell progression that will hurt and sting when you look at all the spells of the next level and wish you could prepare them for the fight now instead of next level when you'll be doing the same with the next level up.

Kizara
2007-11-06, 06:46 AM
Once you start arguing that bonuses are put on an item rather than on the number that they actually apply to, you are rules lawyering (whether you are "correct" or not). Things that can be reasonably interpreted in multiple ways from the ruleset, such as this (q.v. the parts I quoted earlier) are a source of argument, or a DM's call.

That's some brilliant work of logic there, let me paraphrase it for transparency:

If you disagree with me and argue (correctly and politely) how I am wrong, you are an evil rules lawyer. I have intrepreted (read: misunderstood) this differently, and thus created a conflict. Since this sort of thing can cause a conflict (as I have just done so), we can no-longer argue about it because that would be disruptive (to a game we are not playing, while on a discussion board).
Obviously, the only course of action that could thus be taken is an arbitary DM fiat, which I have done, making me right, and you not able to argue without proving my point.

As I said, truly a beautiful and well-presented piece of logic. Unfortunately, I don't feel that 'you aren't allowed to argue with me because I don't like arguement' is actually valid logic, and would like to call you on it. I await your rebuttal.

Freelance Henchman
2007-11-06, 06:56 AM
I know this isn't any authority at all, but in the various CRPGs (NWN) Magic Vestment can be cast on armor *and* shield, and the total AC stacks because the enhancement on the Armor is "Armor AC" and the one on the shield is "Shield AC".

So a non-enchanted Fullplate (8 armor AC) can be enchanted to +5 with MV, and a non-enchanted Heavy Shield (2 shield AC) can also be enchanted to +5, yielding a total of:
8+5=13 armor AC
2+5=7 shield AC
Yields: 13+7=20 increment to total AC.

Kizara
2007-11-06, 07:06 AM
I know this isn't any authority at all, but in the various CRPGs (NWN) Magic Vestment can be cast on armor *and* shield, and the total AC stacks because the enhancement on the Armor is "Armor AC" and the one on the shield is "Shield AC".

So a non-enchanted Fullplate (8 armor AC) can be enchanted to +5 with MV, and a non-enchanted Heavy Shield (2 shield AC) can also be enchanted to +5, yielding a total of:
8+5=13 armor AC
2+5=7 shield AC
Yields: 13+7=20 increment to total AC.

Yes, (as other's have said above) this is correct. However, it is just coincidance that NWN got this part of the rules right. There are a great many instances when they didn't or added completely new things.

In the future, you might want to keep in mind that bringing in invalid and likely inaccurate evidance in an attempt to make a claim actually invalidates your claim. Even if, as is this case, you are actually right.

It would be akin to me claiming, in a discussion about how bashing worked, I referanced how bashing stacks in DotA (Wc3 custom map), and claimed my knowledge of those mechanics as valid evidance to how stun durations stack in D&D. Although they happen to both be the same, my claim would be inherantly invalid by utilizing such evidance as a premise for it.

I hope you find that advice helpful.

Kurald Galain
2007-11-06, 07:13 AM
As I said, truly a beautiful and well-presented piece of logic. Unfortunately, I don't feel that 'you aren't allowed to argue with me because I don't like arguement' is actually valid logic, and would like to call you on it. I await your rebuttal.

That's nothing but a straw man.

Riffington
2007-11-06, 07:21 AM
Yes, I KNOW that wearing full plate armor is teh rulzors protectionwise. I'm just wondering why the God of Knitting and Weaving wants his followers running around in tin suits. As an alternative, he might just provide a divine protection that is similar to the Monk's wisdom AC.

Why would such a deity want his followers to go adventuring, to have a half-decent BAB, or access to the (fairly martial) cleric spell list?
Clerics are warrior-priests, and do not represent peaceful worshippers. They represent men of a certain kind of faith who wield their deity's might in battle. The Knitter has no clerics, Gruumsh has no Cloistered Clerics, Boccob has no Paladins, and Yondala has no Grey Guard.

Zincorium
2007-11-06, 08:46 AM
The point is that I can just as easily argue that you are the one not understanding this, citing different parts of the very same rule book.

All I've seen you cite in this thread is a general explanation of the stacking rules.

Enhancement bonus to armor is an enhancement bonus to armor. There is no difference whether it comes from an intrinsic magical property or a spell. The bonus that is applied to AC is an Armor bonus.

Enhancement bonus to a shield is an enhancement bonus to the shield. There is no difference whether it comes from an intrinsic magical property or a spell. The bonus that is applied to AC is a Shield bonus.

Armor bonuses and Shield bonuses stack.

At no point are you ever getting an enhancement bonus to your AC. In fact, at no point is the magic vestment spell even targeting you.

The concept that you are getting a benefit from casting the same spell twice might be considered slightly relevant to the 'same sources' argument, but in practical consideration it simply does not work out that way.

Jasdoif
2007-11-06, 01:30 PM
Once you start arguing that bonuses are put on an item rather than on the number that they actually apply to, you are rules lawyering (whether you are "correct" or not). Things that can be reasonably interpreted in multiple ways from the ruleset, such as this (q.v. the parts I quoted earlier) are a source of argument, or a DM's call.Take a look at the spell's description.
You imbue a suit of armor or a shield with an enhancement bonus of +1 per four caster levels (maximum +5 at 20th level).

An outfit of regular clothing counts as armor that grants no AC bonus for the purpose of this spell. It quite clearly states that the armor or shield that receives an enhancement bonus. As for these enhancement bonuses....
Magic armor bonuses are enhancement bonuses, never rise above +5, and stack with regular armor bonuses (and with shield and magic shield enhancement bonuses). All magic armor is also masterwork armor, reducing armor check penalties by 1.So the base armor AC bonus, the armor's enhancement bonus (if any), the base shield AC bonus, and the shield's enhancement bonus (if any); all explicitly stack together. (It's a lot simpler to view the enhancement bonus as increasing the armor or shield bonus to AC, as the end result is the same).