Shield Spell

[TroublesomeTree]

All of a sudden, I don't seem to be getting the full AC bonus from the Shield spell's GSF: Abjuration bonus. I'm 99% certain it was working this reset, and relogging doesn't seem to be fixing it.

[xXCrystal_Rose]

Are you wearing plate or armor with more than 4 ac?

[TroublesomeTree]

I am, but that's never made a difference. The bonus AC has only ever conflicted with other spells like Mage Armor, and I'm not getting any message about conflicting armor bonuses.

EDIT: Also, I'm super dumb so I didn't test this first thing, but I still only get +4 AC without my armor on. So it's definitely not giving me the GSF bonus.

[John Doe]

Did you have another armor (cloth) equipped during this test? Edit: you must have any kind of light armor or medium leather equipped.

It should provide a +4 base armor bonus (not cumulative, so neglected if medium plate armor is worn) and +4 deflection ac

[Knight Of Pentacles]

I always thought only wizards with school focus: abjuration got these?

[TroublesomeTree]

No, I was naked when I tested it the second time and it only gave me +4. Wearing armor has never affected the spell at all though.

Wizards are usually the only class that get the Shield spell at all, unless you dedicate a Cleric Domain.

As for Mage Armor, only that spell is modified to not stack with anything else AFAIK, and doesn't give any spell focus bonuses.

[xXCrystal_Rose]

The thing is when this was made clerics were sort of forgotten about. I reported it back in efu:m and if I recall correctly it was stated that it was not supposed to fuction that way for armor users, but it is a bit of a tricky thing to fix and hasn't been touched. This came up again in irc a few days ago.

The spirit of the spell and spell focus is to make abjurers have some impact in the sphere of defensive magic.  Like Divination it has little utility and without some special help there is no difference between a dedicated abjurer and non-abjurer. The idea is to fix the strange situation where an abjurer specialist is actually less able to protect themselves than a non-abjurer is.

There is a problem with it though, and it is full plate clerics. That's +16 ac for just a little gold and a spellcast. It is a lot, and the change was frankly made with spellcasters in mind who relied on magic to protect them, not beefy warriors.

You still get the ability to cast the Shield spell for +4 and wear plate at the same time which is a very significant thing. Also you can fully embrace the Spells aspect and not wear plate at all, using the total +8 ac in a robe as a magical deflective barrier wrapped around yourself that is as strong as a suit of armor but allows perfect mobility.

It's best not to speculate until a DM confirms it was changed or it is indeed a bug, but it was discussed before as being unintended, as the adjustment was meant to help abjurer focused wizards overcome the impairment of losing mage armor by the means of their spell school specialization. Don't be surprised if it has been altered to not work with armor, and if it has, hey, you can still get a bonus +4 ac that nobody else can as a first circle spell, your dispels are stronger, and you are more resistant to being dispelled yourself! All very powerful tools for a cleric. Especially so if you are a martial cleric moreso than a spellcaster oriented type.



(The mage armor portion of it won't apply when naked by the way. You need to be wearing cloth.)

[The Samophlange]

As somebody entirely removed from this issue, I do not see why it is a truly game breaking thing. A cleric who takes shield can get and extra 4 AC, which is nice but hardly game breaking. To get an extra +4 they have to spend 2 feats, which gets them a total of +8 AC for two feats, which is still actually less than just going Improved Expertise. You don't eat the attack penalty, this is true, but you're also not quite as safe. Plus, Improved Expertise could stack on top of other spells to buff armorclass, making it an even better defensive option. With as high as many monster ABs get shield can't prevent you from being at risk. You could theoretically take both Improved Expertise and super-shield, but then you're devoting all of your feats to be very defensive, which basically means you trade the ability to actually kill anything on your own. Even with all that, I am willing to bet many creatures would still be able to reasonably land hits upon you.

Merely my own two cents.

[Paha]

Not a bug. What used to happen was a bug, and it was fixed.

[Talir]

No bug. Someone should test and see if you get +4 armor bonus in cloth. Being naked won't give you anything, you need an armor.

[TroublesomeTree]

Alright. If it's not a bug, it's not a bug, there's just nothing to indicate in the spell changes that it isn't supposed to work that way like there is with Mage Armor. I still feel like spending 2 feats on a non-fighter class for dispellable AC isn't game-breaking or anything, or out of the spirit of one highly specific/oddball cleric domain, but I will soldier on. :)

[Lunivere]

Noting that, back when shield gave +8 AC to Clerics with GSF, I received +8 when naked also.

It's also worth noting that the shield now does stack with Magic Vestment*, meaning that pretty much the same AC can be achieved anyway but it does now take a 3rd circle slot.

EDIT: Cloth armour receives +8 AC for Clerics also. +4 on Plate. Have not checked chainmail, leather, etc.