Argent Savant + Abjurant Champion = +10 AC mage armor/shield? O.O

[Jane_Smith]

Ok - so, if i took 5 levels in argent savant, and 5 levels in abjurant champion, all force and abjuration based spells that grant a armor or shield bonus get +5 more protection ontop of their exsisting amount. Does this -stack-? I mean, effectively, from what I gather is, once you get 5 in each of these prestige classes, you can freely quicken Greater Mage Armor spells any number of times per day, and freely extend them, and they give +16 armor, and a 1st-level, freely quickened and extended Shield spell gives +14 armor? I mean... +30 ac from 1 spells. Is this true? Can it -work-? D:=

Not to mention the +5 DC to dispel them or the bonus duration...

Another interesting question about this prc mix - do the extend effects stack into x3 duration or x4 duration or whatever? Or is it only its applied once?

[jokey665]

I don't know how the two PrC's interact, but I do know that Abjurant Champion's abilities do not work with Mage Armor, as it is a Conjuration and not an Abjuration.

[Jane_Smith]

Actually it specifically states it works with mage armor even in the description of both abilities.

[ClockworkCrow]

It says in the description that Abjurant Champions rely on mage armor, not that the ability works with it. Welcome to one of the major conceptual issues with the class :smalltongue: It was probably intended, as you can certainly see via much of the text, to work with mage armor but that was cut at some point.

[Jane_Smith]

That seems.. oddly... odd. Your right. Meh. Still though, as stated, it still works with shield. Which is still kinda scary once you consider it can give someone +14 shield bonus to AC >.>

[ClockworkCrow]

Well, Argent Savant gives you +2 to your shield spell and Abjurant Champion another +5. The bonuses, from what I can tell, would certainly stack but by the time you achieve them you're looking at level..11? It'd be hard to enter much earlier than that. And for all that work, you're getting a +11 shield bonus and +6 armor (from your altered Mage Armor spell) unless you are using one of the like..two other spells that count which can bump it up a little. At that level, you could have spent replenishable resources (gold) on armor that would be doing the same thing and a few other bits beside. So, it's nice for a fighter-style wizard or sorcerer but not really all that game breaking in my opinion.

[deuxhero]

It says in the description that Abjurant Champions rely on mage armor, not that the ability works with it. Welcome to one of the major conceptual issues with the class :smalltongue: It was probably intended, as you can certainly see via much of the text, to work with mage armor but that was cut at some point.

The class? It's the classes "issue" that some genius thought mage armor should be conjuration?

Really, just ask the DM, odds are that before you mention it, he'll have thought it was right school to begin with.

[DragoonWraith]

I've asked several DMs if they'll let me have Mage Armor as an Abjuration for AC, and I've yet to have one even hesitate in allowing it.

[Jane_Smith]

I know whatca mean, alot of spells dont match their schools at all.

Personally, I have been considering making a new school of spells - Chronomancy, with time spells having the Temporal subschool, etc. Their is already spells that fit this theme marked as 'transmutation' and universal. Slow, haste, time stop, etc. But, other then that, theirs more wrongly listed spell schools then I can count on both hands. :P

[Latronis]

and feet too!

[Mulletmanalive]

Yeah, the two classes with those spells would yield a total defence bonus of +22 [+4 mage armour, +5 champion, +2 Savant, repeat for shield]

The one school i never understood was Conjuration in general. They seemed to slap everything in there for no particular reason. I don't really see why matter creation is anything other than Evocation [energy creation] and always agreed with healing being Necromancy .

That and i never [I]really understood why Illusion and Enchantment are different things; they both change what the target thinks. The line between the non-puppeteer enchantments and glamours is basically non-existent. Also, why the hell is Fear Necromancy?

[Kobold-Bard]

...The one school i never understood was Conjuration in general. They seemed to slap everything in there for no particular reason. I don't really see why matter creation is anything other than Evocation [energy creation] and always agreed with healing being Necromancy [it being life force manipulation]....
Technically healing spells should be Evocation, because they deal with channelling energy from the inner planes. But Necromancy is also appropriate.

...Also, why the hell is Fear Necromancy?
Because Necromancy is eeeeevil!!!

[Drolyt]

I've actually done this with a character, and no Abjurant Champion's abilities do not work on Mage Armor. That character was actually a gestalt with levels in Sorcerer, Paladin, and Monk, so his defenses were through the roof. But yeah. Not that broken. As for schools, yeah healing should be Necromancy as should rezing, almost all damage focused Conjuration should be moved to evocation, Mage Armor should be Abjuration, and that's just a start. The difference between enchantment and illusion is huge, but the difference between how they work is subtle. If I understand it Enchantment means actually casting a spell on a person and modifying his mind from the inside, but Illusion creates an effect external to the creature that modifies his mind.

[arguskos]

Technically healing spells should be Evocation, because they deal with channelling energy from the inner planes. But Necromancy is also appropriate.
Sorry to correct you, but Healing is traditionally Necromancy, which was defined as the manipulation of life energy. This goes into the theory that Necromancy is a conduit to the Energy Planes, while Evocation is a conduit to the Elemental Planes. Very different. :smallwink:

Also, the difference between Illusion and Enchantment is subtle, but clear:
-Enchantment directly alters someone else's understanding of things.
-Illusion alters the way the world seems, and let's the target make the bad decision on their own.

It's about the directness of their actions.

Also, to redefine the schools is easy:
-Abjuration defends with non-tangible energies.
-Conjuration creates non-magical matter and creatures.
-Divination gathers information through mystical means.
-Enchantment directly alters someone's understanding of things.
-Evocation manipulates elemental energies and creates obviously magical objects.
-Illusion alters the way the world is through deceptive means.
-Necromancy manipulates the energy planes and the life force of all things.
-Transmutation changes physical objects, for better or for worse. It does not create.
-Universal handles any effect that branches into three or more schools at once, such as Wish, Miracle, Permanency, Arcane Mark, and such.

[Drolyt]

Sorry to correct you, but Healing is traditionally Necromancy, which was defined as the manipulation of life energy. This goes into the theory that Necromancy is a conduit to the Energy Planes, while Evocation is a conduit to the Elemental Planes. Very different. :smallwink:

Also, the difference between Illusion and Enchantment is subtle, but clear:
-Enchantment directly alters someone else's understanding of things.
-Illusion alters the way the world seems, and let's the target make the bad decision on their own.

It's about the directness of their actions.

Also, to redefine the schools is easy:
-Abjuration defends with non-tangible energies.
-Conjuration creates non-magical matter and creatures.
-Divination gathers information through mystical means.
-Enchantment directly alters someone's understanding of things.
-Evocation manipulates elemental energies and creates obviously magical objects.
-Illusion alters the way the world is through deceptive means.
-Necromancy manipulates the energy planes and the life force of all things.
-Transmutation changes physical objects, for better or for worse. It does not create.
-Universal handles any effect that branches into three or more schools at once, such as Wish, Miracle, Permanency, Arcane Mark, and such.

I agree with your explanations, but one thing I don't understand is this idea that cure/inflict spells somehow draw their energy from somewhere else. Why is this necessary? Why can't they just do what they say? Mending a wound is no different from Transmutation (that's actually yet another school that could incorporate many spells that really belong somewhere else), why doesn't that require some mystical energy?

[arguskos]

I agree with your explanations, but one thing I don't understand is this idea that cure/inflict spells somehow draw their energy from somewhere else. Why is this necessary? Why can't they just do what they say? Mending a wound is no different from Transmutation (that's actually yet another school that could incorporate many spells that really belong somewhere else), why doesn't that require some mystical energy?
Um... they specifically channel Positive and Negative Energy, as they say. And there are planes of that, the Positive and Negative Energy Planes. So, it's easy to see that they channel from those planes.

If you'd like, feel free to move them around, but I'm sticking with the AD&D explanation, since it works well enough.

EDIT: To whit, here is the exact line from Cure Light Wounds (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/cureLightWounds.htm):

When laying your hand upon a living creature, you channel positive energy that cures 1d8 points of damage +1 point per caster level (maximum +5).
It says, "channel positive energy". That says to me that it is coming from somewhere, like, say, the Positive Energy Plane. :smallwink:

[Drolyt]

Um... they specifically channel Positive and Negative Energy, as they say. And there are planes of that, the Positive and Negative Energy Planes. So, it's easy to see that they channel from those planes.

If you'd like, feel free to move them around, but I'm sticking with the AD&D explanation, since it works well enough.

EDIT: To whit, here is the exact line from Cure Light Wounds (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/cureLightWounds.htm):

It says, "channel positive energy". That says to me that it is coming from somewhere, like, say, the Positive Energy Plane. :smallwink:

I'm not arguing what it says, I just think it is weird. I don't usually have energy or elemental planes in my game, I always envisioned magic as drawing the caster's internal mana or ki to alter reality, not drawing on some other source; this even applies to Divine Casters, sure the end result is divine, but in my games I've always held that they use some of their own personal power to cast the spell in addition to divine intervention.

[arguskos]

I'm not arguing what it says, I just think it is weird. I don't usually have energy or elemental planes in my game, I always envisioned magic as drawing the caster's internal mana or ki to alter reality, not drawing on some other source; this even applies to Divine Casters, sure the end result is divine, but in my games I've always held that they use some of their own personal power to cast the spell in addition to divine intervention.
Ah, I thought you didn't catch the line specifically, so I thought to expound.

As for the way you play it, technically, that's a houseruled way of doing it. By the way the default setting in 3.5 is laid out, Cure/Inflict spells in fact work the way I outlined. If you think it's strange, well, I'm sure you are not alone in so thinking. :smallbiggrin: I personally like it, but then again, I'm a crazy huge Planescape fan, so you know.

[Drolyt]

Ah, I thought you didn't catch the line specifically, so I thought to expound.

As for the way you play it, technically, that's a houseruled way of doing it. By the way the default setting in 3.5 is laid out, Cure/Inflict spells in fact work the way I outlined. If you think it's strange, well, I'm sure you are not alone in so thinking. :smallbiggrin: I personally like it, but then again, I'm a crazy huge Planescape fan, so you know.

I agree the way I do it is technically a houserule, but if you realize (and I think you might) how much of what I call "fluff mechanics" (fluff that doesn't have any numbers attached or anything but might still affect the game) was put in the core rulebooks then you'd see that almost any game is being house ruled just to get it to work. Actually, I am a big fan of Planescape as well, it's just that when I run my own games where there are no energy planes that fluff makes no sense. Huh. I don't think I'm making much since here.

[arguskos]

I agree the way I do it is technically a houserule, but if you realize (and I think you might) how much of what I call "fluff mechanics" (fluff that doesn't have any numbers attached or anything but might still affect the game) was put in the core rulebooks then you'd see that almost any game is being house ruled just to get it to work. Actually, I am a big fan of Planescape as well, it's just that when I run my own games where there are no energy planes that fluff makes no sense. Huh. I don't think I'm making much since here.
Yeah, I get your drift. And yeah, there's a lot of "fluff mechanics" as you put it. I personally like many of them, and you might not. Then again, I think that taking a quad move shouldn't deny you your Dex bonus to AC (you're moving quickly... why can't you weave a little?), but the rules say otherwise, so I houseruled that away. Same idea. :smallbiggrin:

Also, yes, Planescape: HELLSYEAH!

[Drolyt]

Yeah, I get your drift. And yeah, there's a lot of "fluff mechanics" as you put it. I personally like many of them, and you might not. Then again, I think that taking a quad move shouldn't deny you your Dex bonus to AC (you're moving quickly... why can't you weave a little?), but the rules say otherwise, so I houseruled that away. Same idea. :smallbiggrin:

Also, yes, Planescape: HELLSYEAH!

I miss Planescape. And SpellJammer. My favorite setting are always homebrewed, but after that those two rock. Mix them together for Doctor Who Themed D&D game, now that is awesome.

[Kobold-Bard]

Sorry to correct you, but Healing is traditionally Necromancy, which was defined as the manipulation of life energy. This goes into the theory that Necromancy is a conduit to the Energy Planes, while Evocation is a conduit to the Elemental Planes. Very different. :smallwink:


I don't doubt that you're actually right, and I agree that Remove Disease, Raise Dead etc. are definitely Necromancy, but I see CLW as no different to Burning Hands, except in end result. The previous manipulate the life force of a being (whih I like to think of as their Essentia), the latter simply suck energy out of another Plane and focus it at a target.

[Mulletmanalive]

Also, the difference between Illusion and Enchantment is subtle, but clear:
-Enchantment directly alters someone else's understanding of things.
-Illusion alters the way the world seems, and let's the target make the bad decision on their own.

The reason i ask the question is that the description that you gave is actually identical to the basic description of Phantasmal Glammer effects [which alter the perception of something, up to and including fake memories in one or two cases, which i can agree with].

I understand that Mind-Reading and Compulsions are definately distinct but Charm and Emotion effects are hazier when compared to Glammer and Phantasm.

My comment on Fear being Necromancy for no good reason is that all other forms of emotional manipulation is based in Enchantment and I can't see the Fear = Evil idea holding any water because the spell doesn't have the tag.

All the strangeness of D&D's magic classification [some of which seems to be political or designed not to upset protest groups...], along with the genre-bleeding that has been occurring steadily through 3e has actually led me to consider trying to design a whole new spell mechanic based on tables and augments.

[deuxhero]

Healing is Necrourgy. Speak with Dead, Corpse Read, and Final Vision (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/jbe2RVkN4S7kRnMoy2U.html) are Necromancy.

[arguskos]

I don't doubt that you're actually right, and I agree that Remove Disease, Raise Dead etc. are definitely Necromancy, but I see CLW as no different to Burning Hands, except in end result. The previous manipulate the life force of a being (whih I like to think of as their Essentia), the latter simply suck energy out of another Plane and focus it at a target.
Again, see the spell description for details. :smalltongue: I personally like it as Necromantic, it helps strip the "lolevilz" out of Necromancy. Then again, 3.5 is wonderful because it's so easily mutable, so you know what? Dig whatever you want man. :smallbiggrin:


The reason i ask the question is that the description that you gave is actually identical to the basic description of Phantasmal Glammer effects [which alter the perception of something, up to and including fake memories in one or two cases, which i can agree with].

I understand that Mind-Reading and Compulsions are definately distinct but Charm and Emotion effects are hazier when compared to Glammer and Phantasm.
Well, I should clarify. Those descriptions I tossed out there are what I feel, from 12 years of playing, the spell schools were meant to be all along, and what I rule them to be in my games. Besides, they make sense, right? Even if the book's descriptions are... um... silly sometimes (such as the aforementioned Glamer inanity).


My comment on Fear being Necromancy for no good reason is that all other forms of emotional manipulation is based in Enchantment and I can't see the Fear = Evil idea holding any water because the spell doesn't have the tag.
Honestly, I've never understood that either. Move it to Enchantment, where it belongs.


All the strangeness of D&D's magic classification [some of which seems to be political or designed not to upset protest groups...], along with the genre-bleeding that has been occurring steadily through 3e has actually led me to consider trying to design a whole new spell mechanic based on tables and augments.
Like I said, I reclassified the schools to make some more sense, and to have some clarity to them. Illusion and Enchantment especially have always had a strange overlap to them, and I figured that delineation was the clearest. One of these days, I'll actually reschool the entire PHB.

[Eloel]

Ok - so, if i took 5 levels in argent savant, and 5 levels in abjurant champion, all force and abjuration based spells that grant a armor or shield bonus get +5 more protection ontop of their exsisting amount. Does this -stack-? I mean, effectively, from what I gather is, once you get 5 in each of these prestige classes, you can freely quicken Greater Mage Armor spells any number of times per day, and freely extend them, and they give +16 armor, and a 1st-level, freely quickened and extended Shield spell gives +14 armor? I mean... +30 ac from 1 spells. Is this true? Can it -work-? D:=

Not to mention the +5 DC to dispel them or the bonus duration...

Another interesting question about this prc mix - do the extend effects stack into x3 duration or x4 duration or whatever? Or is it only its applied once?

Try Legacy Champion in place of Argent Savant. It's a combo I'm very fond of.
At 20th level, you have 18th level casting (Fighter 1/Wizard 5/Abj.Champ 5/LC 9 wastes 2 levels). You have 5 levels of Abj Champ, and 8 'virtual' levels of Abj. Champ. That adds up to 13.

Now, the freaky things you can do with that 13.

1- Greater Luminous Armor (BoED), for +22 Armor
2- Shield, for +17 Shield
3- All your abjuration spells of 7th level or lower are auto-quickened, a huge reduction in your buff round. Oh, another thing to note; Greater Dispel Magic is a 6th level spell. Yes, 6 < 7.

[Zom B]

I've asked several DMs if they'll let me have Mage Armor as an Abjuration for AC, and I've yet to have one even hesitate in allowing it.

This. I'm surprised they never bothered going back and errata'ing it.

[Eloel]

This. I'm surprised they never bothered going back and errata'ing it.

They did errata it, Mage Armor is no longer mentioned in there.

So, Errata goes 'against' what DMs rule.

[arguskos]

They did errata it, Mage Armor is no longer mentioned in there.

So, Errata goes 'against' what DMs rule.
Uh, I think he was asking "why did they never errata Mage Armor to be Abjuration?"

[Eloel]

Uh, I think he was asking "why did they never errata Mage Armor to be Abjuration?"

Duh, because it makes more sense as an Evocation, obviously. I know it's Conjuration right now, but seriously.

[Zom B]

Uh, I think he was asking "why did they never errata Mage Armor to be Abjuration?"

I more meant why Abjurant Champion was not errata'd to include Mage Armor. I just picked the wrong post to quote.

[arguskos]

Duh, because it makes more sense as an Evocation, obviously. I know it's Conjuration right now, but seriously.
Yeaaaaaaaaaah, it's pretty thick. WotC: No, we won't issue errata, cause that's too MANLY of us! :smallsigh:

[Jane_Smith]

Meh, been working on a year-long revamp of all the schools/new schools/etc of magic. Been a bit hetic, never really finished after i did necromancy, universal, and chronomancy. Though I was half-way in evocation. Made all force-related effects evocation - wall of force, mage armor, shield, etc.