Luminous Armor + Magic Vestment... really?

[NuSair]

Do they stack? I wouldn't think so, since LA really isn't armor.

Luminous Armor


(Book of Exalted Deeds)


Abjuration
Level: Sanctified 2,
Components: Sacrifice
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Target: One good creature touched
Duration: 1 hour/level (D)
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)


This spell, favored among eladrins visiting the Material Plane, envelops the target in a protective, shimmering aura of light.
The luminous armor resembles a suit of dazzling full plate, but it is weightless and does not restrict the target's movement or mobility in any way.
In addition to imparting the benefits of a breastplate (+5 armor bonus to AC), the luminous armor has no maximum Dexterity restriction, no armor check penalty, and no chance for arcane spell failure.
Luminous armor sheds light equivalent to a daylight spell and counters darkness spells of 2nd level or lower with which it comes into contact.
In addition, the armor's brightness causes opponents to take a -4 to penalty on melee attacks made against the target.
This penalty stacks with the attack penalty suffered by creatures sensitive to bright light (such as dark elves).
Sacrifice: 1d2 points of Strength damage.

Magic Vestment


(Player's Handbook v.3.5, p. 251)


Transmutation
Level: Artificer 1, Cleric 3, Knight of the Chalice 3, Savant 3 (Divine), Strength 3, War 3, Celestia 3, Halfling 3, Nobility 3, Initiate of tchazzar 3,
Components: V, S, DF,
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Target: Armor or shield touched
Duration: 1 hour/level
Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless, object)
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless, object)


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.

 

[Ahnehnois]

You're right. Just because it provides an armor bonus does not make it armor. The spell does not state than any physical object that could be considered armor is created or have an effect entry that states such, and thus I think it is fair to assume that the target entry for Magic Vestment is not satisfied.

Not that anyone ever accused the BoED of being well edited. A spell that provides an AC bonus and an attack roll penalty for opponents is kind of redundant, and it supersedes the normal dazzled condition for some reason.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I'm not actually seeing anything preventing a stack. One is an armor bonus, one is an enhancement bonus.

*Sigh*

The armor effectively gives you +4 to AC (because of the semi-blindness penalty) before you cast any other spells. People say the Book of Exalted Deeds is filled with cheese. I think these people are right.

 

[NuSair]

I'm not actually seeing anything preventing a stack. One is an armor bonus, one is an enhancement bonus.

*Sigh*

The armor effectively gives you +4 to AC (because of the semi-blindness penalty) before you cast any other spells. People say the Book of Exalted Deeds is filled with cheese. I think these people are right.

The reason I would say it doesn't stack is that MV says - imbue a suit of armor.

LA isn't a suit of armor. It says it looks like 'dazzling suit of full plate'. But, no where does it say that it is armor.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

As you quoted, Magic Vestment also says "An outfit of regular clothing counts as armor that grants no AC bonus for the purpose of this spell"

So as long as the target is wearing clothing, it can be targeted by MV. And since LA targets a "person"...it looks like they stack.

 

[NuSair]

As you quoted, Magic Vestment also says "An outfit of regular clothing counts as armor that grants no AC bonus for the purpose of this spell"

So as long as the target is wearing clothing, it can be targeted by MV. And since LA targets a "person"...it looks like they stack.

What clothing? This is a VoP Wildshaped druid into bear/wolf form that has been giving me headaches for a while now.

 

[Ahnehnois]

As you quoted, Magic Vestment also says "An outfit of regular clothing counts as armor that grants no AC bonus for the purpose of this spell"

So as long as the target is wearing clothing, it can be targeted by MV. And since LA targets a "person"...it looks like they stack.

To me, if you look at it that way, the clothing's +0 AC bonus then becomes enhanced, meaning that the target creature now has an armor bonus from LA and from this clothing, which don't stack. LA is neither a suit of armor or a piece of clothing.

 

[Jackinthegreen]

To me, if you look at it that way, the clothing's +0 AC bonus then becomes enhanced, meaning that the target creature now has an armor bonus from LA and from this clothing, which don't stack. LA is neither a suit of armor or a piece of clothing.

Depends on how one interprets the modifier type rules. Note that an enhancement bonus is strictly different from whatever it's actually enhancing.

In this case with a VoP druid without any clothes on it doesn't seem to make any difference. The character isn't actually wearing armor, thus MV can't be used on it. Likewise, the character doesn't even have clothes on, so MV's rules about being used on clothing don't apply.

NuSair, of course a VoP druid is going to give you headaches. Vow of Poverty almost universally does that because it's just plain broken, especially for characters that don't even need to bother with equipment.

 

[NuSair]

Depends on how one interprets the modifier type rules. Note that an enhancement bonus is strictly different from whatever it's actually enhancing.

In this case with a VoP druid without any clothes on it doesn't seem to make any difference. The character isn't actually wearing armor, thus MV can't be used on it. Likewise, the character doesn't even have clothes on, so MV's rules about being used on clothing don't apply.

NuSair, of course a VoP druid is going to give you headaches. Vow of Poverty almost universally does that because it's just plain broken, especially for characters that don't even need to bother with equipment.

How would it matter upon interpretation? If MV enchants clothing, the MV and the LA are each granting an armor bonus to AC, right?

Yeah, as I started digging through his character and correcting things, he's started to feel like I am picking on him. I can't seem to get him to realize that if he was applying things right (the one before this was using a 3.0 version of a spell that had been updated in SC and before that it was stacking the VoP AC bonus with Luminous Armor and before that it was adding HP due to constitution changes from Wild Shape and then Polymorph after correcting him on Wild Shape) that I wouldn't be hounding him.

 

[Ahnehnois]

he's started to feel like I am picking on him.

Well, I can't speak to the broader context of how you treat one player vs the others, but BoED talks plenty about how exalted feat vows require a lot of special talking with the DM. VoP is a controversial ability. If he had any understanding of this and wanted to go there anyway, he's inviting scrutiny. Especially since he's trying dubious combos with it, it seems like he's pushing the boundaries of what is appropriate.

And in any case, you're the DM. If you don't like something on a character sheet, it's your prerogative to change it. It's up to you to decide whether he's just trying to build a good character and maybe needs some boundaries set to reign him in, whether he's trying to be disruptive in some way and there's a deeper personal issue you need to deal with, or neither or something else.