or good grief, what's wrong with you?
While the concept of armor being more than just an increased defensive target number, and instead designing armor so it offers scaling ability sets unlockable by character abilities was pure genius. The goal of using that concept to increase diversity and flavor among characters was a laudable one, the initial Tome Armor from Races of War and the subsequent community effort to fill in the blanks has a number of serious failings.
- Tome is not always as clear as it should be where it replaces Core armor rules and where it interacts with core armor rules. Rather than arguing over it again, it's better to do a full rewrite which removes any grounds for argument over how to gain heavy armor proficiency and whether proficient characters have reduced movement in heavy armor or not in Tome.
- Armor Check Penalty was a bad idea and unnecessary complication to begin with. Splitting into into ACP and ASP was adding complexity purely for the sake of complexity, especially as fully two thirds of the listed armors had ACP and ASP within 2 points of each other.
- Penalty reductions per level were implemented very much like bringing back THAC0 and then adding division, subtraction and exclusion steps. Since the initial penalties were needless complexity, doing these kind of mathematical contortions was not merely adding complexity for the sake of complexity but was doing it solely for the purpose of insulting the players about being bad at math. Well I can't stand for that, not when it's so very much easier to just write "Hey, moron, you're bad at math" into the rules text.
- The stated goal of getting people to care about more than 3 types of armor was not achieved in any meaningful sense. Between so many of the armors having the exact same abilities at the levels where people actually play, many of those abilities being so minor as to be nearly worthless and the strong tendency for the relatively few good abilities to be concentrated on armors with high numeric bonuses, the list ends up with only a handful of armors most PCs will ever care about.
- A number of the heavier armors had ability sets which scale by flavor instead of function. It's highly unlikely for any Tome character with heavy armor proficiency to have the correct skill ranks to be able to use Mechanus Armor or Silk Steel Armor to full benefit. Thus these armors are only notable for specialized niche characters, and most players should not care about them.
- Despite there only being a few armors worth caring about, the total number of armors in tome is over 9000! and they are not laid out with any rhyme or reason. This results in players having to read through long lists of irrelevant information during chargen, which is fun for nobody and wastes everyone's time.
- With some viable multiclassing options and or material from the fragmentary Book of Gears, mid level Tome characters have access to better ways to get higher Armor bonuses than most armor in Tome games, meaning that armors are only useful for their ability sets.
Why Armor Check Penalties Need to Go
We're ditching Armor Check Penalty for proficient characters, instead armor gets a set of non-proficiency penalties. If you are proficient, you do not suffer any penalty for wearing armor. This includes both the actual numeric armor check penalty as well as movement reductions and arcane spell failure - all of that gets folded into nonproficiency. Thus if you're not proficient, then you take a penalty to all d20 rolls, and for each point of that penalty you both reduce all movement speeds by 5 ft (to a minimum of 5 ft) and suffer a 10% arcane spell failure chance.
Okay, but that doesn't answer why?
Because while characters in heavier armor being slower and clumsier might be more"realistic", that's not what happens with the 3e WotC rules in place, and it's even further from what happens with the first pass Tome Armor. In a WotC game, any character who can afford it is better off with a permanent Greater Mage Armor than with anything less than Half Plate, and consequently Dispel Magic becomes a better debuff than Rusting Grasp - that's not realism, that's idiosyncrasies of the spell system. In a game with Tome rules and Tome Armor 1.0, player characters can take 2 levels of Dungeonomicon Monk (which at full bab and all good saves is a reasonable multiclass for a lot of folks) or pick up a Book of Gears Defending weapon and come out at least even with all light armors and all but 3 medium armors - while Armored in Life and Defending Weapons have no Max Dex limit nor Check nor Stealth Penalties.
So we are expecting characters to actually wear a type of armor that has penalties in Tome, that armor has to start at better than a +5 bonus. Yet starting light armor at more than +5 and scaling upwards for medium and heavy armors would push things off the RNG, so it's better to just let characters who have the proficiency ignore the penalties. That way we avoid a writing bunch of Light and Medium armor that players will ignore. Again.
That this also simplifies the math each player has to do is an added benefit. The Tome 1.0 rules on armor stealth penalties scaling with BAB while armor check penalties stayed static armor resulted in such confusion that they actually made people's eyes glaze over when they were used and ended up being ignored by more than half of the Tome playerbase. ( If you're in the remaining minority: congrats, you're a smart cookie. Now go outside to play for once before you decide to start a "THACO was easy" argument and get put on everyone's ignore list)
And hey, it's not like a Cloak of Resistance ever penalized a Wizard's Spellcraft (or Chance to learn spells in prior editions) even though it increases her magical defenses, so how was it ever anything but intentional martial-class hosery masquerading as "realism" that armor impaired a knight's movement and athletics ? That was a rhetorical question, but just in case you missed it, the answer is "It wasn't"
Sadly, we do have to keep Max Dex bonus to AC, as this complication both helps to keep things on the RNG and helps to ensure that different characters will consider different types of armor instead of always always always wearing the heaviest one they are proficient with.
Furthermore, since we're ditching Armor Check Penalty, that means that encumbrance is going to become important for a number of medium and heavy armor characters again. So you're going to want to track light, medium and heavy loads for characters. If you want to keep things very simple, you can decide that armor proficiency lets the weight of your armor not count against your load limits; if you want to have heavier armor require more strength or still provide some restrictions for characters you can track it scrupulously. Either one is fine, but you should pick one and the entire group should follow it.
Now if we ditch, ACP for Non-proficiency penalty, that means that each and every armor which requires a proficiency must must must have a non-proficiency penalty. We can't be like Core with non proficient characters encouraged to run around in masterwork studded leather until they upgrade to mithral shirts, laughing at their -0 penalties the entire time. However, we totally can have "armors" that don't require proficiency, these are the genre classics of loincloths and wizard robes and they fall under Cloth armor (aka Non-Armors), all of which gets to have a non-proficiency penalty of zero, meaning that everyone can wear it, and most characters who don't have heavier armor proficiencies will.
Rethinking Light, Medium and Heavy Armor
Now since D&D is among other things, a miniatures combat game, the armor types have to represent the types of armor that are identifiable on minis. This means that I'm replacing Light, Heavy and Medium with "Cloth", "Leather", "Chain" and "Plate". Because I'll be damned for the umpteenth time if I can differentiate Ring Mail from Chain Mail or Scale Mail from Plate Mail on any fig I've ever painted ( heck 5 minutes on google turns up a rather convincing argument that you've only even heard of Ring Mail because Gygax had inaccurate sources ) I know a lot of you don't play with minis and some of you want them to go away. That's fine, you can keep calling the categories Non-Armor, Light, Medium and Heavy, it's a one-to-one correspondence. It's meant to make it easier for players at a table with minis to tell something about the defenses of the characters the figures on the table represent. So if you don't use (at least vaguely appropriate) minis, there's no difference between the terminology and you can use them interchangeably and the only confusion will be that some things don't work like Core Armor (chain shirts aren't light armor, hide armor isn't heavy armor) - but hey if you were happy with Core Armor, you wouldn't be using Tome, let alone reading revisions to Tome, so I don't have to care. Yay for apathy !
So, What are You Wearing?
making armor choices easy and yet meaningful
In an effort to fit armor types into a manageable amount of conceptual space and keep player decisions about what type of armor to kit their character out in to a reasonable selection while still offering a variety of armors that various characters should care about this armor revision lays out armor according to three variables, and players have 3-4 choices for each variable.
- What type of armor are you wearing? This determines what type of proficiency is necessary and what the nonproficiency penalty is. There are four categories of armor: Cloth, Leather, Chain and Plate (alternately: Non-Armor, Light, Medium and Heavy), and in general characters are best off wearing the heaviest of those for which they have proficiency.
- How much of it are you wearing? Each type of armor has three different levels of coverage. From a flavor perspective, this is whether a character is wearing an armored vest for armor, a half suit of armor or a full suit with near total coverage. From a mechanical perspective, this is simply a slider between the armor bonus that the armor provides and the maximum Dexterity bonus to AC that the armor allows. In general, characters are best off wearing armor which provides the highest armor bonus while still allowing them to benefit from their full Dexterity bonus to AC.
- What special material or other properties does it have? This determines precisely which scaling ability set the armor gives a wearer. For each type and coverage level of armor there are exactly three options: one of which grants abilities based on the wearer's BAB; one of which grants abilities based on the wearer's ranks in a listed skill; and one of which grants abilities based on the highest level spell that the wearer can cast. In general, characters are best off wearing armor for which they can unlock the highest level abilities
How Do I Put This Thing on?
cleaning up armor proficiency
In core, characters get proficiency via class features or via feats - and that's not a big deal, because in Core, feats are limited by "fighters can't have nice things". In Tome, feats are supposed to be good, and spending one just to get medium armor proficiency just isn't worth it compared to other options in Races of War or Tome of Fiends. Even with the powered-up chainmail in this revision, Medium Armor proficiency basically boils down to "Your Armor plus Max Dex can be one point higher, and you have a few additional choices for armor ability sets" Hence, in games with the RoW version of Elusive Target on the table, Medium Armor Proficiency is a niche character option at best. That means that in Tome games, armor proficiency is nearly always only given by class. That combines with other features of Tome games to make it rare for PCs to wear medium armor and very rare for PCs to wear heavy armor - and that's a bad thing, because it means that a lot of the armor entries are wasted space.
Thus we need an armor proficiency feat that people might actually take. Now some characters do get armor proficiency through class, so such a feat needs to go beyond merely granting proficiency. Furthermore, if he goal is to eliminate armor types that are wasted, it needs to open up multiple types of armor to anyone who takes it:
Armor Mastery [Combat]:
You are skilled in wearing various types of armor.
You gain proficiency with light and medium armor
+1 BAB: You gain proficiency with heavy armor
+6 BAB: For puposes of activating armor scaling abilities: you may subsitute your BAB +3 for the number of ranks you possess in any skill or you may substitute ( 1+ your BAB ) divided by 2 for the highest level spell you can cast.
+11 BAB: You may treat the armor bonus and max dex of any armor you wear as though they were both 2 points higher
+16: BAB By mixing and matching pieces between two suits you may gain access to the ability sets of any two sets of armor you own at the same time. You are still only wearing one set of armor and therefore must choose one set of armor and max dex figures to use.
There, it's a feat some characters will want, the initial abilities open up armor categories, the +6 ability opens up scaling abilities characters wouldn't otherwise access, the +11 BAB opens up numerics for characters who are pimping their Dexterity and well, there's a top level ability that will probably never see play. (see below)
And while we're at it, have one for Shields too:
Shield Mastery [Combat]
You are skilled in fighting with a shield for defense.
You gain proficiency with shields and great shields
+1 BAB: When an opponent initiates a grapple against you, you may opt to escape by sacrificing your shield. Effectively, their grapple / grab on attempt results in disarming you of your shield instead.
+6 BAB: For purposes of activating shield and great shield scaling abilities: you may substitute your BAB+3 for the number of ranks you possess in any skill or you may substitute ( 1+ your BAB ) divided by 2 for the highest level spell you can cast.
+11 BAB: Each round when fighting with a shield, you may negate a number of AoOs against your person equal to the number of attacks you are entitled to from your BAB.
+16 BAB: You now apply any shield bonus you gain to your Touch AC
Eliminating Still More Words Players Have Zero Reason to Read
or why scaling should happen at lower levels
Tome armor version 1.0 offers an armor bonus at level 0 and then new abilities at lvl 1, lvl 5, lvl 10, lvl 15. This is bad because it means that two of the four abilities on each suit will almost never see play in actual games. It's also bad because it is just subtly different enough from the levels where scaling feats grant abilities to add the potential for confusion.
I, for one am perfectly willing to assume that characters with access to the post-Wish economy are kitting themselves out in unique personalized gear, if not artifacts, instead of looking for loopholes (tenser's transformation, divine power, etc) to unlock the final abilities offered through any suit of armor they own. Creating a mundane suit of armor with the prices listed in the Tome PDF is well within the parameters of both 3.0 and 3.5 wish, and it is plausibly within the reach of the "other effects clause" of the 3.0 version of wish and arguable from the "increase magic abilities" clause of the 3.5 version of wish that a wisher could alter, bend or ignore ability prerequisites for the abilities granted by armor -- which even with the introduction of the Tome scaling abilities-- still remains mundane equipment.
Thus in the spirit of Tome, we're going to assume that post-Wish economy characters just go right ahead and do that. If you like, write up a "universal" moderate quality for Book Fragment of Gears-style items that lets the wearer ignore non proficiency penalties and scaling ability prerequisites or something. If not, you're still in the same nonstandard game of mother-may-I that D&D games into the double digit levels always hit in 3e D&D and likely writing a bunch of your own rules on the fly - if you're having fun, keep doing that. But as for me, I'm gonna write armor that grants abilities which characters can gain by 10th level and therefore might see play in games which I am a part of. With an eye towards spreading things out to minimize dead levels, I'm going set armor up to give abilities out to optimized characters at 1st, 4th, 7th and 10th levels.
Scaling Abilities, How Do They Work?
There are three ways armor can scale, by BAB, by the number of ranks in a skill or by the highest level spell you can cast. To quote Races of War, "that's because those are the only things in the game that actually have anything to do with the level your character is in any way that we feel good about. "
Armor with abilities which scale according to BAB should be self explanatory: characters gain abilities at +1 BAB, +4 BAB, +7 BAB and +10 BAB. Armor with abilities which scale according to skill ranks should likewise be self explanatory: characters gain abilities with 4 ranks, 7 ranks, 10 ranks and 13 ranks in the relevant skill.
However armor which scales according to the highest level spell you can cast requires a bunch of explanation and some splitting of hairs for a couple of reasons.
Firstly, the astute reader will have already noticed that the primary spellcasting classes do not get new spell levels at character levels 4 or 9, so it cannot precisely follow the pattern of the BAB and Skill Rank ability sets. There's not an easy way around that, so those ability sets are going to scale by granting abilities to characters who can cast 1st level spells, 3rd level spells, 4th level spells and 5th level spells. This means that compared to other classes in other armors, wizards and clerics in max spell scaling armor get their second armor ability one level late and their final armor ability one level early. That should even out.
Next there's a surprising amount of difficulty in defining just what precisely a Spell is, and a nontrivial amount of ambiguity figuring out which level many of them happen to be, and some of the other Tome material complicates these tasks. We could just say a spell is a spell is a spell and be done with that definition. That's the approach Complete Arcane took and while it keeps things simple, it leaves the Fire Mage out in the cold and Gnomes buried, so it's probably worth the added complications to let Spell-Like Abilities count as spells for such purposes.
Moving on to spell level, there are a large number of spells which appear at different levels on different class lists. That's not so bad, we can just say that whatever level a spell is on the list you cast it from, it's that level for purposes of qualifying for armor abilities. But that leaves issues with (Sp) abilities which duplicate such spells. Gnomes get Speak with Animals, which is a 1st level spell on the Druid and Ranger list, but a 3rd level spell on the Bard list, so we're going to have to rule that for such things, the (Sp) ability in question counts as the lowest level it can be according to the PHB/SRD spell lists (or lowest level it can be in the book it appears for non core crap ). However, that still leaves issue for all the various (Sp) abilities which do not duplicate spells are are not explicitly tagged as the equivalent of an Nth level spell - like most of the Fire Mage class list. So we're going to do what I did when I revised the Fire Mage and say that such things default to counting as a spell of half the class level (or HD) where they are first gained - round fractions up. This lets a Fire Mage count as having 1st level spellcasting because they have Fire Bolts, and lets them count at having 5th level spellcasting when 9t level gives them Sculpt Flames. However, we are not quite done yet - there is an issue that some of the PHB spells are grossly overcosted and some of the fanmade classes make such spells available as appropriately leveled Spell-Like Abilities. And while it may be totally fine in the abstract to have a class which gets say Greater Dispelling, Greater Magic Weapon, Magic Vestment, Polar Ray or something similar as a Spell-Like Ability at 1st level, that can open up potentially problematic interactions with the scaling armor rules and allow characters to access much higher level abilities than they really should have. There is not a clean answer here, as it is literally impossible for me to go through the entire set of Tome Compatible Classes ( since it's an open set with new classes being added ) and nip all of these interactions. So the options are either deciding that SLAs are not Spells for these purposes or that any given MC is going to occasionally nerf one of those and decide that despite the actual listed level of the spell it only gets to count as half the class level where it is granted for these purposes.
Finally most of the spell casting armor lets a character expend a spell of a given level for another particular spell of a given level. This is a way to give armor a lot of functionality that matters to various spellcasters, but it also means that I need to lay down the ground rules for how activating such abilities works and that the SLA and spell-level issues will come up again.
This ability works as follows: you expend a prepared spell or one of your unused spells-per-day slots of the requisite level or higher, and you cast the spell the armor gives you as though you had cast it yourself, with the notable exceptions of the spell potentially being a different level from the armor than it is on your spell list and the casting time. Thus casting the spell provokes AoOs, uses your caster level and the save DC is based on your relevant spellcasting attribute. Thus casting the spell has all the same components that it would have if you cast it yourself (although personally I recommend entirely ditching material components, that's beyond the scope of an armor revision). The spell the armor grants is always cast as though it were the minimum level spell which can be expended to gain it from the armor. This means that sometimes armor scaling abilities might let you cast a spell at a lower or higher level than it appears on your class spell list - that's an unavoidable side effect of having spells which are different levels for different classes. More importantly this also means that metamagic feats which would alter the level of such a spell cannot be applied to it, because it must be cast at a level determined by the armor. However, you can apply metamagic which does not alter the spell level to such a spell. Expending a spell you have in order to activate a spell from your armor is a standard action in which you both expend one spell and also cast the spell which the armor grants. Whether you expend a spell with a casting time of more or less than one standard action, or whether the spell the armor grants usually has a casting time of more or less than one standard action - it is a standard action when you cast it this way.
Now it is intended that characters should be able to trade in uses of their Spell-Like Abilities in order to cast the spell(s) such armor grants. Even though some characters are going to have at-will SLAs that allow them to cast a spell from the armor over and over, care has been taken that the spells granted by armor do not get problematic when spammed repeatedly -- this is why it needs to be a standard action to cast such spells and why some such armor abilities impose self-only limitations on the spells they grant. However, allowing this does cause us to revisit the issues about (Sp) abilities which mimic spells found on multiple lists, (Sp) abilities which are not tagged with a spell level-equivalence., and (Sp) abilities which grant fair-level access to overcosted spells. So to rephrase the suggestions for handling those from three paragraphs back in a slightly more relevant way: For purposes of expending uses to activate armor abilities, (Sp) abilities should count as the lowest level that the spell they replicate is on any PHB class list or half of the class level where it was gained. There is a chance that a MC may have to rule that some particular SLAs which duplicate specific spells counts as half the class level where it was gained, regardless of the spell level. This is because some of the listed spells are listed as much higher levels than they should be. Even though Polar Ray clocks it at 8th level in the PHB, letting someone who gets it as a fair-levelled SLA trade it for an actual 3rd level spell is actually too powerful, banned from use. See also Magic Vestment, Greater Magic Weapon, and Greater Dispelling, all of which are fine for 1st level characters to get as SLAs, but not fine to let 1st level characters trade them for 3rd, 4th or 5th level spells.

