Data
  1. Data
  2. DATA-76

[Pathfinder] Mithral armor negates armor proficiency requirements

    Details

    • Type: Bug Bug
    • Status: Needs Code Work Needs Code Work
    • Priority: Minor Minor
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Affects Version/s: 5.16.2, 6.01.04
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: Pathfinder
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      From the Pathfinder Core Rulebook (page 154):

      Mithral is a very rare silvery, glistening metal that is lighter than steel but just as hard. When worked like steel, it becomes a wonderful material from which to create armor, and is occasionally used for other items as well. Most mithral armors are one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations. Heavy armors are treated as medium, and medium armors are treated as light, but light armors are still treated as light. This decrease does not apply to proficiency in wearing the armor. A character wearing mithral full plate must be proficient in wearing heavy armor to avoid adding the armor's check penalty to all his attack rolls and skill checks that involve moving.

      When creating Mithral Full Plate armor, my Ranger (light/medium armor only) is proficient with it and should not be.

      – david
      Papa.DRB

      PCGen 5.16.2
      Datasets loaded: Pathfinder core rules, Pathfinder Traits, Pathfinder Beastiary

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          James Dempsey
          added a comment -

          Confirmed in 5.16.2 with a rogue being proficient with Mithril Chainmail but not Chainmail.

          Show
          James Dempsey
          added a comment - Confirmed in 5.16.2 with a rogue being proficient with Mithril Chainmail but not Chainmail.
          Hide
          James Dempsey
          added a comment - - edited

          Note: 3.5 differs here as it makes no mention of proficiency and thus is assumed to affect it also. Thus we need to flag the conditional situation with either a house rule (use type of base armor for proficiency uses), a change to the ARMORTYPE tag or an additional eqmod tag to force the type for proficiency purposes. Any preferences?

          Show
          James Dempsey
          added a comment - - edited Note: 3.5 differs here as it makes no mention of proficiency and thus is assumed to affect it also. Thus we need to flag the conditional situation with either a house rule (use type of base armor for proficiency uses), a change to the ARMORTYPE tag or an additional eqmod tag to force the type for proficiency purposes. Any preferences?
          Hide
          Chris Chandler
          added a comment - - edited

          I'm currently leaning towards a new tag. That way we can cover both instances - One material that affects everything but proficiency, and another that affects everything including proficiency.

          Show
          Chris Chandler
          added a comment - - edited I'm currently leaning towards a new tag. That way we can cover both instances - One material that affects everything but proficiency, and another that affects everything including proficiency.

            People

            • Assignee:
              Unassigned
              Reporter:
              David R. Bender
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              1 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated: