Need a ruling on deflect

Godogma · 09-27-2010, 11:07 PM

My question is, how does deflect work? Here is the exact text as presented in the Magic book.

Adds a Defense Bonus to armor,
clothing, a shield, or a weapon. This
adds to all active defense rolls made
by the user.

Now, that seems much like the swords from D&D enchanted with Defender, or a Ring of Protection and would seemingly work fine....

Does the bonus apply to the entire body or only to the section covered by the item? Because as written it adds to ALL defense rolls. The question doesn't concern stacking merely how it works.

sir_pudding · 09-27-2010, 11:16 PM

The problem is that Magic wasn't really updated for 4e. In 3e Deflect gave a PD bonus and "full suit" armor existed.

In 4e it gives a bonus to DB for a location. Since it gets discounted for this, it can only give a bonus to defenses against hits to that location. The only exception is Deflect on shields which isn't discounted and probably ought to just add to the shield's DB.

Lupo · 09-28-2010, 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

In 4e it gives a bonus to DB for a location. Since it gets discounted for this, it can only give a bonus to defenses against hits to that location. The only exception is Deflect on shields which isn't discounted and probably ought to just add to the shield's DB.

I would rule that the enchanted item is just a "special effect", and only the discount is relevant to determine the hit locations in which the Defense Bonus applies.

E.g., a "Deflect" ring might protect the whole body (for full energy cost) or just the arms (for 15% of the listed cost) or just the hands (for 5%).
The same goes for a Deflect gauntlet, or helm, or whatever...

Captain-Captain · 09-28-2010, 04:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

The problem is that Magic wasn't really updated for 4e. In 3e Deflect gave a PD bonus and "full suit" armor existed.

In 4e it gives a bonus to DB for a location. Since it gets discounted for this, it can only give a bonus to defenses against hits to that location. The only exception is Deflect on shields which isn't discounted and probably ought to just add to the shield's DB.

Full suit still exists from Lite 4th Edition. It just doesn't protect your eyelashes.

But Deflect as a PD source did have text stating it covered the areas the armor protected. If you aren't using the full suits from Lite, indifidual armor pieces provide Deflect protection only for the areas covered.

Tinman · 09-28-2010, 08:01 AM

I agree with Lupo. If you pay full cost it wold work like a D&D ring of protection. If you buy it 'discounted' (which I would not allow as GM - except for the hand, maybe) it would protect a lesser area.

Just be aware that if you have two sourses for deflect, you only get the best. They dont stack.

Frex: Leather armor w/ deflect 1 & ring w/ deflect 2. Your def bonus is 2 not 3.

Godogma · 09-28-2010, 08:03 AM

I was aware of them not stacking. I'm actually hoping for a ruling alongside Lupo's from Kromm or the equivalent, seems to me if I pay full price for the enchantment instead of the incremental cost it should cover the entire body.

Especially as I'm quite uncertain how a weapon covers anything and it states specifically ALL active defense rolls.

Tinman · 09-28-2010, 08:15 AM

Na. You don't need Lord Kromm for this one. Magic p.66 explicitly states:

The energy costs listed are for a full
suit of armor; individual pieces of
armor cost a fraction of the full-suit
price (see box).

Godogma · 09-28-2010, 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinman

Na. You don't need Lord Kromm for this one. Magic p.66 explicitly states:

The energy costs listed are for a full
suit of armor; individual pieces of
armor cost a fraction of the full-suit
price (see box).

And Magic p67 explicitly states:

Deflect
Enchantment
Adds a Defense Bonus to armor,
clothing, a shield, or a weapon. This
adds to all active defense rolls made
by the user.

So are you agreeing with Lupo and I that if I pay full price for the enchantment it covers the whole body or saying that Deflect can only be bought incrementally? Because it confuses the crap out of me currently.

Tinman · 09-28-2010, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinman

I agree with Lupo.

Yes. I agree with Loupo & you as I said in my original post.

Godogma · 09-28-2010, 09:36 AM

Ah, sorry I missed the name on your first post and your second post. Unfortunately my GM doesn't agree with that point of view so I was hoping for another ruling from Kromm - there was a ruling Kromm gave out via email that I think matches up with what I said but he thinks only covers the torso hit location due to the enchantment being on the shirt. This is the quote in question. (EtVous posted this in another thread)

Originally Posted by e-mail from Dr. Kromm
* A shield is the only realistic way to get DB. All other sources of DB
involve magic, superscience, etc. This explains why the main discussion
of DB in the BASIC SET is in the ultra-specific context of shields.

* The DB from the Deflect spell is a magical force field that surrounds
the hit location(s) protected by the item that bears the Deflect spell.
It ISN'T a surface property like PD in 3e! It's a force field.

* The DB of a shield (be it natural or boosted by a Deflect spell) and
that of a Deflect spell on armor or clothing "stack."

* The DB from multiple Deflect spells on armor or clothing covering a
hit location doesn't "stack." It obeys the last paragraph of "Limits on
Effect" on p. B237 -- i.e., only the highest DB applies. This doesn't
have to be the DB of the outer layer, for reasons given above.

Suppose I have a magic corselet with Deflect +1 (DB 1), a magic shirt
with Deflect +2 (DB 2), an ordinary medium shield (DB 2), and a magic
medium shield with Deflect +1 (DB 3). I could have following combos:

Naked: DB 0.

Magic corselet, no shield: DB 1.

Magic shirt, no shield: DB 2.
Magic corselet and magic shirt, no shield: DB 2.
No armor or clothing, medium shield: DB 2.

No armor or clothing, magic medium shield: DB 3.
Magic corselet, medium shield: DB 3.

Magic shirt, medium shield: DB 4.
Magic corselet, magic shirt, and medium shield: DB 4.
Magic corselet, magic medium shield: DB 4.

Magic shirt, magic medium shield: DB 5.
Magic corselet, magic shirt, and magic medium shield: DB 5.

If the GM allows Deflect on a weapon, it can stack up as well. Me, I
think that's excessive.

09-27-2010, 11:07 PM	#1
Godogma Join Date: Jul 2010	Need a ruling on deflect My question is, how does deflect work? Here is the exact text as presented in the Magic book. Adds a Defense Bonus to armor, clothing, a shield, or a weapon. This adds to all active defense rolls made by the user. Now, that seems much like the swords from D&D enchanted with Defender, or a Ring of Protection and would seemingly work fine.... Does the bonus apply to the entire body or only to the section covered by the item? Because as written it adds to ALL defense rolls. The question doesn't concern stacking merely how it works.

09-27-2010, 11:16 PM	#2
sir_pudding Wielder of Smart Pants Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Ventura CA	Re: Need a ruling on deflect The problem is that Magic wasn't really updated for 4e. In 3e Deflect gave a PD bonus and "full suit" armor existed. In 4e it gives a bonus to DB for a location. Since it gets discounted for this, it can only give a bonus to defenses against hits to that location. The only exception is Deflect on shields which isn't discounted and probably ought to just add to the shield's DB.

09-28-2010, 08:01 AM	#5
Tinman Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: New York City	Re: Need a ruling on deflect I agree with Lupo. If you pay full cost it wold work like a D&D ring of protection. If you buy it 'discounted' (which I would not allow as GM - except for the hand, maybe) it would protect a lesser area. Just be aware that if you have two sourses for deflect, you only get the best. They dont stack. Frex: Leather armor w/ deflect 1 & ring w/ deflect 2. Your def bonus is 2 not 3.

09-28-2010, 08:03 AM	#6
Godogma Join Date: Jul 2010	Re: Need a ruling on deflect I was aware of them not stacking. I'm actually hoping for a ruling alongside Lupo's from Kromm or the equivalent, seems to me if I pay full price for the enchantment instead of the incremental cost it should cover the entire body. Especially as I'm quite uncertain how a weapon covers anything and it states specifically ALL active defense rolls.

09-28-2010, 08:15 AM	#7
Tinman Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: New York City	Re: Need a ruling on deflect Na. You don't need Lord Kromm for this one. Magic p.66 explicitly states: The energy costs listed are for a full suit of armor; individual pieces of armor cost a fraction of the full-suit price (see box).

09-28-2010, 09:36 AM	#10
Godogma Join Date: Jul 2010	Re: Need a ruling on deflect Ah, sorry I missed the name on your first post and your second post. Unfortunately my GM doesn't agree with that point of view so I was hoping for another ruling from Kromm - there was a ruling Kromm gave out via email that I think matches up with what I said but he thinks only covers the torso hit location due to the enchantment being on the shirt. This is the quote in question. (EtVous posted this in another thread) Originally Posted by e-mail from Dr. Kromm * A shield is the only realistic way to get DB. All other sources of DB involve magic, superscience, etc. This explains why the main discussion of DB in the BASIC SET is in the ultra-specific context of shields. * The DB from the Deflect spell is a magical force field that surrounds the hit location(s) protected by the item that bears the Deflect spell. It ISN'T a surface property like PD in 3e! It's a force field. * The DB of a shield (be it natural or boosted by a Deflect spell) and that of a Deflect spell on armor or clothing "stack." * The DB from multiple Deflect spells on armor or clothing covering a hit location doesn't "stack." It obeys the last paragraph of "Limits on Effect" on p. B237 -- i.e., only the highest DB applies. This doesn't have to be the DB of the outer layer, for reasons given above. Suppose I have a magic corselet with Deflect +1 (DB 1), a magic shirt with Deflect +2 (DB 2), an ordinary medium shield (DB 2), and a magic medium shield with Deflect +1 (DB 3). I could have following combos: Naked: DB 0. Magic corselet, no shield: DB 1. Magic shirt, no shield: DB 2. Magic corselet and magic shirt, no shield: DB 2. No armor or clothing, medium shield: DB 2. No armor or clothing, magic medium shield: DB 3. Magic corselet, medium shield: DB 3. Magic shirt, medium shield: DB 4. Magic corselet, magic shirt, and medium shield: DB 4. Magic corselet, magic medium shield: DB 4. Magic shirt, magic medium shield: DB 5. Magic corselet, magic shirt, and magic medium shield: DB 5. If the GM allows Deflect on a weapon, it can stack up as well. Me, I think that's excessive.