Talk:Divine Armor (5e Spell)

I really don't like this spell. It has a very narrow scope and seems to compensate by being able to produce AC bonuses above and beyond the expectations of the Bound Accuracy model of 5e.

It targets unarmored creatures, which leads me to think it might be intented to shelter civillians and such, which is pretty noble and something not fully covered with low level magic. But on the PC side of that fence the Barbarian and Monk stand to have the most to gain from this to put them into AC categories that bust the bound accuracy system wide open.

The spell seems to follow the idea of mage armor in terms of providing an AC bonus without requiring concentration. I feel that if as spell to protect multiple civilians is wanted, maybe a multi target THP buff could do just that. Or maybe make it a 2nd level spell that acts like a shield other spell, but can target another creature within 30 or so feet and then provides 5 THP to your target. Maybe it can allow you to target more creatures or grant more THP.

Another option is to summon armor on your target, or transforms the targets clothes into a set of divine armor and/or shield that doesnt need prof (Armor X + casting stat/dexm like by recreating mundane armor) or (10 + casting stat + Dex). This way we get a neat Divine Armor spell that the cleric, paladin, and druid can use the isn't just a refluffed Mage Armor. If really needed, maybe have an enhancement bonus to the armor that follows a similar scaling to the Magic Weapon spell.

Really trying make sure we also avoid the awful trait of 4e where everyone has a different colored laser. Looking at you Holy Shuriken you thieving bucket of suck.

Overall this spell seems to speak of a well meant intent to protect but possesses the wording for blatant open ended abuse.--Gr7mm Bobb (talk) 07:26, 17 February 2017 (MST)

I've changed it. If the ability modifiers are good, it can grant a better AC than mage armor, so I have made the duration 1 hour (compared to 8 hours). I'm not sure the 1 minute duration made it worth taking. 1 hour means it's not a complete replacement for wearing armor, so more suitable for (as you say) protecting civilians. Marasmusine (talk) 07:57, 17 February 2017 (MST)

Definitely an improvement. Thanks for the help. Eventually I intend to find the stones to make changes to other peoples material that is out of whack. But the spell atm feels safer and more suited for people that like protecting people.--Gr7mm Bobb (talk) 08:58, 17 February 2017 (MST)

Yeah, just go for it. You seem to know your 5e stuff. If something is controversial, it can always be reverted and a discussion started on the talk page. Marasmusine (talk) 09:59, 17 February 2017 (MST)

Shield

Does wearing a shield affect the Armor Class provided by this spell (as barbarian's unarmored defense) or does the shield not make a difference (more like monk's unarmored defense)? I personally think the latter would be more appropriate. — Guy (talk | edits) 05:13, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

The shield affects the monk's UA, not the barbarian's, but the question is still valid. SirSprinkles (talk) 05:44, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, but my question specifically asked whether a shield affects Armor Class. Arguably a +2 bonus is more of an effect than +0 (and no, I'm not implying that is how monk's unarmored defense works). :^) — Guy (talk | edits) 06:18, 7 March 2017 (UTC)