[.11] Armor Enchanments

jwconvery

Spellsword
With the various armor enchants, do you have to be utilizing the armor that is enchanted?

For example,
I enchant a 5 pt suit of Armor with Armored Shell
Do I get the extra max body if I am just holding the rep?
Wearing it but not using it? (having Arcane Armor over top of it)

Or do I have to fully wear it and be using it as the armor in question?

-Joe
 

Ragnarok

Scout
Marshal
A good bump. I was wondering something similar. Since armor usually consists of separate garments how does that effect the rep for the MI? Do I need to have only the beacers of my armor? Or does it have to be the same full set? Any armor tottal containing the armor with the enchantments on it?
 

Feldor

Scholar
I'd assumed the enchant was on a specific size armor tag. So that I might have a 45 point of armor tag that also has armored shell? And if that is the case, and I'm not wearing enough armor to physrep it, does the enchantment work?
 
Last edited:

Muir

Fighter
That last one I'd assume is the same answer as rendered armor tags. Ritual is tied to the rep, if you're not wearing the whole rep, then you're not getting the armor value (although the rep is indestructible despite not being all one piece).

That could all use some official clarification now that there are more than a couple relevant rituals.
 

Polare

Count
Alliance Rules
Moderator
Seattle Staff
The intent is that Armor specific rituals benefit the suit of armor on which they are worn, and *only* that suit of armor.

-Bryan Gregory
ARC
 

Shades

Newbie
If someone was wearing an enchanted rep with Arcane Armor, could they use the enchantments and the Arcane armor?

Do the armor enchantments have to be worn or equipped to be used?
 
I suspect that if the intent of them is to reward wearing actual armor instead of using Arcane or Celestial Armor, ten they cease to function if the suit they are tied to is superseded by one of those effects, and also that since they are tied to an actual physical suit of armor, that you must be actively wearing said armor to get any use out of the magic.
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
The Armor rituals cannot be tied to Arcane Armor. I know, because I asked before. For me. :(
 

Feldor

Scholar
So, if I have two different armor rituals - say one on a chain coif and one on set of leather bracers, can I wear them both at once and gain the benefits from both? Are they both considered as part of one suit of armor? If so, would they be considered 1 item for a "Destroy Magic" ritual? How about for a shatter?

I guess some of what I'm getting at is, what is considered a suit of armor? In reality, a suit of armor in most cases is a bunch of distinct physreps; sometimes of a variety of materials. We also have an armor tag, which is physrep independent and represents a (sometimes partial) sum of the physreps we are wearing. If 7 locations of armor, if I a remove the armor on a location, is it considered a separate suit? (it would require a separate armor tag). Note that 1.3 shatter by default references the size of the armor tag in determining what it affects, not the size of the physreps.

(If its not clear, I think we need a clear definition of what a suit of armor is; and consistently apply it across affects and enchantments.)
 

Gilwing

Baron
Alliance Logistics
So, if I have two different armor rituals - say one on a chain coif and one on set of leather bracers, can I wear them both at once and gain the benefits from both? Are they both considered as part of one suit of armor? If so, would they be considered 1 item for a "Destroy Magic" ritual? How about for a shatter?

I guess some of what I'm getting at is, what is considered a suit of armor? In reality, a suit of armor in most cases is a bunch of distinct physreps; sometimes of a variety of materials. We also have an armor tag, which is physrep independent and represents a (sometimes partial) sum of the physreps we are wearing. If 7 locations of armor, if I a remove the armor on a location, is it considered a separate suit? (it would require a separate armor tag). Note that 1.3 shatter by default references the size of the armor tag in determining what it affects, not the size of the physreps.

(If its not clear, I think we need a clear definition of what a suit of armor is; and consistently apply it across affects and enchantments.)
Check what ARC posted https://alliancelarp.com/forum/threads/armor-enchanments.38036/#post-301694 in post number 6 of this thread.
If a ritual targets the suit of armor it's the whole armor. If a ritual targets an item, and you chose to have it on a piece of armor, like your left bracer, then that is fine as well but it cannot be a armor ritual
 

EC-JP

Scholar
Alliance Rules
See also prior rulings and clarifications re: rendered armor. Unlike most other items, the armor tag is the magic item.
 

Feldor

Scholar
Check what ARC posted https://alliancelarp.com/forum/threads/armor-enchanments.38036/#post-301694 in post number 6 of this thread.
If a ritual targets the suit of armor it's the whole armor. If a ritual targets an item, and you chose to have it on a piece of armor, like your left bracer, then that is fine as well but it cannot be a armor ritual
That link just goes back to this thread. Is this what you were referencing? https://alliancelarp.com/forum/threads/expensive-crafted-magic-items.1948/#post-36505


See also prior rulings and clarifications re: rendered armor. Unlike most other items, the armor tag is the magic item.
Do you have a link? Searching the ARC forum shows nothing relevant.


I'll comment that this clarification is in direct conflict with the ARC thread I think Gilwing was referencing, which says specifically that a set of armor would need to be engraved with a number and be stealable.


With that clarification, does that mean the magic armo is physrep independent as long as it is sufficiently physrep'd?
 

Melimir

Newbie
Asheville Staff
I am sure this is going to be an unpopular opinion with some, but here are my observations.

I think the entire point of these rituals is to benefit those individuals who choose to wear "real armor" instead of AA or celestial armor. I believe that trying to rep solely a bracer or glove or whatever (trying to rep the bare minimum having zero downsides of the armor and gain all the benefits) is defeating the point here. Its opposite of what is trying to be encouraged.
There are two reasons for this. The first is there is an inherent disadvantage with wearing real armor. Wearing any sizable amount of armor does slow you down (majorly with heavier materials/varieties) and this is a game where speed is one of the key aspects of combat, and armor absolutely physically tires you out quicker. The second reason is that it does promote immersion for actual players and builds interest in those outside of the game looking in and considering playing for the first time. Seeing individuals clad in plate/chainmail/leather/cloth gambison/ect significantly adds to the ascetic and depth of the fantasy world we are pretending for the weekend is reality in contrast to seeing a bunch of individuals simply running around in tabards and sweatpants.

I understand the arguments against. The best two I've heard are that its expensive and its physically difficult for some people for medical reasons. My argument against the first, is I party with two people who prove this not to be true. The first made his own chainshirt using rings bought off Amazon. The second used larger sized PVC pipe cut in half and then molded using heat. A little spray paint with some roughing and some leather straps, and it actually looked damned good. I had my doubts about it when I was told what he was doing, but they both truthfully surprised me how well they came out. As for medical reasons, this version does not penalize individuals for using non-metal forms to make "look alike" armor. That should open up the door for creative individuals to work around the weight that could be medically excluding. We have an individual who wears a suit of plates that probably weighs 35lbs, maybe more. The individual with the "PVC platemail" weighed a fraction of that. So for individuals who desire to have the "plated knight" look, it is possible to get that +4 armor/location bonus (which is very significant), but yes, you will not get the additional +1 for "actual material". In comparison to the current ruleset, I would say that is a significant compromise.
 

Gilwing

Baron
Alliance Logistics
...The second used larger sized PVC pipe cut in half and then molded using heat. A little spray paint with some roughing and some leather straps, and it actually looked damned good. I had my doubts about it when I was told what he was doing, but they both truthfully surprised me how well they came out.
Do you have any pictures? I would love to see how it came out.
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
I’m never going to use real armor for any character I play.

I’m okay with not having access to armor rituals.
 

Feldor

Scholar
Sturdy Armor (General, Item [Armor], Passive) - This Ritual will create a suit of armor that takes 5 seconds less to refit. The Sturdy Armor Ritual grants a passive effect to the suit of armor it is cast upon that does not require an activation phrase to use as the refit time will be decreased by 5 seconds for the entire duration of the Ritual. This Ritual may only be cast once per suit of armor and must be cast on a physical suit of armor. ...
See also prior rulings and clarifications re: rendered armor. Unlike most other items, the armor tag is the magic item.
Sturdy armor specifically excludes itself from that clarification leading us to need to define what is meant by a "physical suit of armor"?


The intent is that Armor specific rituals benefit the suit of armor on which they are worn, and *only* that suit of armor.

-Bryan Gregory
ARC
So a couple questions, if all the physreps being used to provide armor points are considered one suit of armor together for this enchantment; does that mean if I remove one piece of the armor, its considered a different suit of armor, even if I have sufficient physreps for my current armor tag? It'd both no longer be complete item for enchantment purposes and might require a different size armor tag.

In 2.0, we allow layering of armor to make up a suit of armor. If I have a "sturdy armor" enchanted suit of armor, and layer an additional piece of armor over it, does the enchantment still work? How about if I add a piece of armor that covers a previously not-covered location?

Given that rituals that last more than a year include a render indestructible, if layering armor over a suit of "sturdy armor" enchanted armor or removing a piece (like a helm) deactivates the enchantment, does this mean you could offensively (possibly by trickery) make use of this to permanently destroy the suit of armor via shatter? (I found a reference to someone else claiming it had been ruled this would not work; but I could not actually find a ruling saying as much, so I took it as heresay.)


My actual point with these questions is that I think defining a "suit of armor" as a single specific collection of physical reps and not an armor tag is something we should not be doing given the complexity of armor. It both opens up all sorts of edge cases, and doesn't reflect the physical realities of armor.

For perspective, my personal armor physreps vary during an event from 2 physreps to 11 physreps that make up that day's "suit of armor", depending on if I going for 22, 26, or 30 points of armor. With the addition of allowing layering in 2.0, I could see having as many as 15 separate physreps involved in one suit of armor. Thinking of a "suit of armor" as a single item is unrealistic. (You could think of those 3 separate armor values as separate suits of armor, but the 30 point suit includes everything in the 26 suit, and the 26 suit includes everything in the 22 point suit. And the 26 suit is actually 2 different configurations depending on if I'm wearing a kilt.) (In 2.0, I'm looking at armor that varies from 35-56 points, and though that initially will be capped by ranks of wear-extra-armor. ) It feels awkward to me that I might need multiple suits of enchanted armor depending on what my physical limitations are on any given day. (Also, I like parenthetical asides.)
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
Sturdy armor specifically excludes itself from that clarification leading us to need to define what is meant by a "physical suit of armor"?




So a couple questions, if all the physreps being used to provide armor points are considered one suit of armor together for this enchantment; does that mean if I remove one piece of the armor, its considered a different suit of armor, even if I have sufficient physreps for my current armor tag? It'd both no longer be complete item for enchantment purposes and might require a different size armor tag.

In 2.0, we allow layering of armor to make up a suit of armor. If I have a "sturdy armor" enchanted suit of armor, and layer an additional piece of armor over it, does the enchantment still work? How about if I add a piece of armor that covers a previously not-covered location?

Given that rituals that last more than a year include a render indestructible, if layering armor over a suit of "sturdy armor" enchanted armor or removing a piece (like a helm) deactivates the enchantment, does this mean you could offensively (possibly by trickery) make use of this to permanently destroy the suit of armor via shatter? (I found a reference to someone else claiming it had been ruled this would not work; but I could not actually find a ruling saying as much, so I took it as heresay.)


My actual point with these questions is that I think defining a "suit of armor" as a single specific collection of physical reps and not an armor tag is something we should not be doing given the complexity of armor. It both opens up all sorts of edge cases, and doesn't reflect the physical realities of armor.

For perspective, my personal armor physreps vary during an event from 2 physreps to 11 physreps that make up that day's "suit of armor", depending on if I going for 22, 26, or 30 points of armor. With the addition of allowing layering in 2.0, I could see having as many as 15 separate physreps involved in one suit of armor. Thinking of a "suit of armor" as a single item is unrealistic. (You could think of those 3 separate armor values as separate suits of armor, but the 30 point suit includes everything in the 26 suit, and the 26 suit includes everything in the 22 point suit. And the 26 suit is actually 2 different configurations depending on if I'm wearing a kilt.) (In 2.0, I'm looking at armor that varies from 35-56 points, and though that initially will be capped by ranks of wear-extra-armor. ) It feels awkward to me that I might need multiple suits of enchanted armor depending on what my physical limitations are on any given day. (Also, I like parenthetical asides.)
1) A ritual targeting armor is on the tag, not on the phys rep (unlike normal magic items). A Shatter would destroy a tag that is not indestructible, but not one that is. The phys rep is, effectively, irrelevant except that you must be wearing the entire rep associated with the armor tag in order to benefit from the armor tag.

2. This is a game, and there are plenty of instances where the system does not convey strong realism. While have an armor slot system would convey more “realism,” it would convey its own challenges from a systematic standpoint.
 

Muir

Fighter
I am sure this is going to be an unpopular opinion with some, but here are my observations.

I think the entire point of these rituals is to benefit those individuals who choose to wear "real armor" instead of AA or celestial armor. I believe that trying to rep solely a bracer or glove or whatever (trying to rep the bare minimum having zero downsides of the armor and gain all the benefits) is defeating the point here. Its opposite of what is trying to be encouraged.
There are two reasons for this. The first is there is an inherent disadvantage with wearing real armor. Wearing any sizable amount of armor does slow you down (majorly with heavier materials/varieties) and this is a game where speed is one of the key aspects of combat, and armor absolutely physically tires you out quicker. The second reason is that it does promote immersion for actual players and builds interest in those outside of the game looking in and considering playing for the first time. Seeing individuals clad in plate/chainmail/leather/cloth gambison/ect significantly adds to the ascetic and depth of the fantasy world we are pretending for the weekend is reality in contrast to seeing a bunch of individuals simply running around in tabards and sweatpants.

I understand the arguments against. The best two I've heard are that its expensive and its physically difficult for some people for medical reasons. My argument against the first, is I party with two people who prove this not to be true. The first made his own chainshirt using rings bought off Amazon. The second used larger sized PVC pipe cut in half and then molded using heat. A little spray paint with some roughing and some leather straps, and it actually looked damned good. I had my doubts about it when I was told what he was doing, but they both truthfully surprised me how well they came out. As for medical reasons, this version does not penalize individuals for using non-metal forms to make "look alike" armor. That should open up the door for creative individuals to work around the weight that could be medically excluding. We have an individual who wears a suit of plates that probably weighs 35lbs, maybe more. The individual with the "PVC platemail" weighed a fraction of that. So for individuals who desire to have the "plated knight" look, it is possible to get that +4 armor/location bonus (which is very significant), but yes, you will not get the additional +1 for "actual material". In comparison to the current ruleset, I would say that is a significant compromise.
I agree, in general, and think most of the discussion is to clarify stuff like 'if I take off my helm or gloves, does the rit still work'.
 
Top