As per the MotB Manual; Armor Skin 21st level You gain a +2 natural armor bonus to Armor Class. Considering how NWN also has +2 AC, this could be potentially a bugged feat or just poor editing (most often it's the later). Ragimund (talk) 11:27, January 17, 2020 (UTC)
No bug: it's +1 as per the in-game descriptionRaelind (talk) 02:44, January 18, 2020 (UTC)
Because the in game description is never wrong, heh? Co-incidently. I just had a player quote the in game description of Divine Power and say it's not working correctly. If only if we had some other information to compare against or the ability to reason? Ragimund (talk)
You might consider checking your character sheet and combat logs.Raelind (talk) 05:38, January 18, 2020 (UTC)
Really, does it sound like I've suggested its actually +2 AC in game? You might consider thinking, before implying. Ragimund (talk)
Yes, you did. You might consider working on your written communication and thinking more carefully about what you want to say, before reducing your thoughs to writing.Raelind (talk)
Try reading it again and point out where? Just in case you've forgotten our chat on https://nwn2.fandom.com/wiki/Talk:Luck_of_Heroes and my notes https://nwn2.fandom.com/wiki/User_talk:Ragimund Ragimund (talk) If perhaps you'd like to contribute, do you know where the example is that NWN referenced +2 Armor Skin from? Ragimund (talk)
I'm not sure I understand the premise behind the question, since I never mentioned NWN1 here; that was you.Raelind (talk) 01:55, March 14, 2020 (UTC)
So, Epic Level Handbook; 2001
Armor Skin [Epic]
Your skin becomes like armor.
Benefit: You gain a +2 natural armor bonus to Armor Class, or your existing natural armor bonus increases by 2.
This feat does not stack with any natural armor bonus granted by magic items or nonpermanent magical effects.
Special: A character can gain this feat multiple times
Its effects stack.
Looks as NWN didn't set the precedence and with NWN2 following 3.5e, we got another edit mistake. +2 AC would have been a choice feat rather than something taken last with a bonus fighter feat.
NWN2 Tip. Considering Toughness on average grants 10% increase in endurance and Armor Skin reduces hits on average by 5% or +5% endurance (however AC has diminishing returns, so if your AC is very low that maybe much higher at 10%) Even though its preferrable to avoid damage than absorb, Armor Skin is also bypassed by Touch attacks. So suggest as a bonus feat for average or below AC characters, higher AC characters would do better with Toughness, if looking to improve endurance.
As for answer to the question which Raelind avoided and likely caused his confusion. No, the in game description is not always correct and has sometimes been worse than the manual. Possible two separate individuals wrote the different descriptions but one does not simply negate the other. Ragimund (talk) 10:11, January 21, 2020 (UTC)
The above is a perfect example of a straw man argument. This all got started based on your first comment on this talk page. Put another way: why pose a rhetorical question when everyone has known FOR OVER 12 YEARS that this feat only gives a +1 bonus to AC in NWN2? (since 27 November 2007). If you wanted to note the physical MoTB game manual had a typo or editing error, why didn't you just say that instead? (I took the liberty of doing this on the main page and gave you credit for the find, as I usually do). You certainly went on about this long enough when it was completely unneccesary. Your contributions to this Wiki are valuable and appreciated, but please try to be civil.Raelind (talk) 01:22, March 14, 2020 (UTC)
My first statement says. The manual has +2, its most likely poor editing, you threw the accusation of not knowing that its +1 AC in game and here again throwing more accusations.
Then you should read the above comments again, since I never implied I did not know this feat's features (though you appear not to). Again, this wiki has known for 12 years the feat gives only +1. It's in the edit history, or did you not check that before posting?
Go review your own attitude.
That's a telling statement from someone who has listed on the first page of their profile the results of The Bartle Test of Gamer Psychology, where you show you are 60% Griefer - and I agree with that assessment. You have a history of making negative insinuations against others. From a quote of yours above on this talk page: ---- Co-incidently. I just had a player quote the in game description of Divine Power and say it's not working correctly. If only if we had some other information to compare against or the ability to reason? ---- That post sounds like somone who wants to or otherwise enjoys putting others down (AKA a griefer). All you had to do was provide him or her with the correct information and move on instead of insinuating they lacked the ability to reason.
Talk about straw man arguments, answer the questions put to you. Yes, that's my statement is it wrong or do you take offence? Ragimund (talk)
What questions to me are unanswered? On the other hand, you still haven't answered why this entire talk page got started in the first place, when you simply could have made the edit on the main page about your observation of the misprint and been done - that had to be done for you. Your statement about Divine Power is correct but, again, the comment after it was unneccesary and indicative of a poor attitude: someone who would rather take a stab at others instead of being helpful and moving on. You never responded to that either.
Considering the times you've called me snarky and your continual assumptions, here's a read https://mystudentvoices.com/dont-make-assumptions-and-don-t-take-things-personally-the-four-agreements-ad2a0ad720f4 Ragimund (talk) 01:19, March 15, 2020 (UTC)
I've called you snarky because, as shown above, you appear to look for ways to take issues with others and have problems with your tone. This talk page, and your responses, provide more examples. It's usually not the information you provide per se, it's the manner in which you provide it. I'm sure you're familiar with the expression - a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down - You instead seem to have a preference for giving it with salt and vinegar. Raelind (talk) 03:15, March 15, 2020 (UTC)
I take your statement "You might consider checking your character sheet and combat logs." as I need to check what it is in game. If not, then what did you mean?
As previosuly noted, this feat's correct number (+1) has been known for a dozen years. As for checking the combat logs, you've given me similar suggestions: does it somehow sound worse when you hear it coming from others?
Yes I know, I'm not disputing that (read my linked notes) but it seems to be your only repeated defense. Yes having someone who's ego is larger than his skill because he didn't even know about combatdebugging and keeps making assumptions is annoying. I'm sure Vagg has a similiar opinion from your comments with him, would you like the link? However I agree with your statement "You certainly went on about this long enough when it was completely unneccesary"
Do you? I noticed you still haven't responded to my observations about:
- your lack of civility
- your griefer tendancies, as evidenced by a penchant to put others down if they disagree with you, both here and on the NWN2db site (since you chose to bring site that up, I figure I am free to do the same)
- the needlessly started argument. Which could have been prevented by checking the facts first and making a simple post on the main page
I hope you have gone on long enough Ragimund (talk)
I did not feel the need to bring other people or other websites into the conversation. However since you did, I will point out this isn't the NWN2 builder site: comments are actually monitored for civility here. Take a day to consider that and, again, watch your tone on this Wiki. Raelind (talk) 04:27, March 15, 2020 (UTC)
Try also as I have asked before and point out where I've said +2 in game. Ragimund (talk) 03:24, March 15, 2020 (UTC)
See again above comments. I will advise you again to be civilRaelind (talk) 03:41, March 15, 2020 (UTC)
My final comments on this. You know very well from Luck of Heroes and my notes, I consider the +1 AC from Luck or Armor Skin to be rarely worth a feat, that means all your comments here have not been in good faith and your behavior can only be described as spiteful https://nwn2.fandom.com/wiki/Talk:Luck_of_Heroes https://nwn2.fandom.com/wiki/User_talk:Ragimund
I fail to see what Luck of Heroes has to do with your introductory comments on this feat.
But if you wish more answers
First up, its a talk page; I don't need to submit a proofed report to your standards and its not my issue if you fail to understand so often, you can ask questions instead of assuming and insulting
A proofed report was neither needed nor asked for. It's been known for 12 years this feat only gives a +1 Natural Armor bonus, yet you went on as if what was in the MoTB manual was even possibly true by now. Then you appeared to get upset when I asked you check your in-game combat logs. You never did answer my question about whether you checked the edit history on ths feat. It's fairly obious you didn't.
As for NWN reference for +2, well that response is too late. But if you need a premise to answer a question already solved. The premise, was about to trying to get you to contribute instead of being a problem, about seeing if their was a precedence and just why NWN was +2. Guess that's why you fail to answer questions, you misdirect
I'm still trying to understand the above question, since it has so many pronouns. It looks like another straw man accusation. Again, all you had to do was check the edit history to see what was going on with this feat. Not doing so is certainly something I can see you criticizing others for not doing first. And you've done it with me before. Does it somehow sound worse when you hear it from others, after you've gone into a rant about it?
You hit the point "when everyone has known FOR OVER 12 YEARS that this feat only gives a +1 bonus to AC in NWN2" yet with that knowledge and after our chat on Luck, you still tell me to check in game.
True enough: you dont appear to trust my judgement much of the time, but you do appear to trust combat logs. And with your knack for discovering interesting bugs and features in the game, I assumed you were the kind of person who had already had A) checked the edit history and B) may have found an exception - it turns out you did neither. But you did manage to get very upset when I asked to do what you asked me to do before. I can't see anyone needing to excuse or apoligize for that, given the above.
That's not a poor assumption, because you knew everyone and especially myself understood the feat.
Doubtful, given all the above. Otherwise, why ask the rhetorical question?
So your implication has another purpose, like your continual insults
Straw man, again.
Then, you get upset because I tell you to think before making such implications.
Projection, I believe, is the term that applies here.
That was me being civil, next time I won't.
That is, of course, your choice. But I will maintain standards on this Wiki.
I've had other players give similar advice, I can roll with the humor but your comment wasn't in good faith and you still continue to push that implication
This appears to be another thinly veiled attempt to bring other individuals and websites into the argument.
Its hard to respond to observations when I thought you were telling me your version of civility is where you throw insults and accusations and everyone else has to do as you say.
In absence of specifics or new infomation, this appears to be more projection on your part.
But I didn't know they were questions until after you blocked my account and then made them questions.
You were cautioned several times before to be civil. Did you actually need a bold faced statment saying: be civil or get banned for a day? I could see you loudly proclaiming: help, help, I've just been threatened. As for not knowing I asked questions, you've had several opportunities to answer. Even now, you still haven't answered the most salient ones.
I was being civil,
You didn't resort to vulgarity, but your griefer tendencies came out strong enough here.
its difficult restraining from your insults and poor actions
Penchant to put others down, pot, kettle
More projection.
but I'm referring to the community. As I avoid singling individuals, doubt you know who I was referring to about Divine Power
What in the world does that have to do with this talk page?
You started the argument and continued it.
More projection. Gaslighting attempts, even.
But I know more of the facts from it though, even with no help from you
Not this time, given your very first posts on this talk page.
So you're for including unknown persons as support for your accusations
No, that was you; I referenced those comments above in bold.
but I can't mention your behavior elsewhere.
Except that you did.
But the Divine Power comment wasn't wiki either. I understand you don't like nwn2db, you can't filter comments there. Seems you prefer one sided arguments
Bringing outside websites into the conversation again?
Fulfilled your Judge, Jury and Executioner complex, blocked my account without warning
Again, you had several warnings.
and after posting more of your questions, even though you're making the trouble on the topic I started.
Gaslighting again.
CONTRIBUTORS SHOULDN'T BE ADMIN, LACK OF IMPARTIALITY
If you stop for a moment to think, you'll realize that comment makes no sense at all.
I'd not be at a loss if my account is blocked I was reluctant to join anyway.
I'm not sure why you felt reluctant to have joined this wiki, but I'm very glad you have made the contributions you did; the site is better off because of it. You were blocked for one day (the minimum amount of time it could be done for). My issue is with your griefing, which is very clear on this page.
However if not, my civility towards your insults has ended.
This makes me wonder what you'd be like when you are, from your perspective, no longer civil.
Hopefully this site won't have to deal with more of your edits like bow enchantments and attack bonus stacking, or those oversized images because I suspect you'll have more.
You have corrected several errors of mine. And that's a good thing: this site needs accuracy and consistency. But in many of those instances you apprear to relish more in proving others wrong than the actual corrections (remember my quoting you in bold above?). Also, from previous conversations on talk pages on this Wiki, you appear to have a strong distaste for being challanged about the validity of your assumptions. This site is about helping others, with a spoonful of sugar if needed. But you apppear to have little patience for that, preferring salt and vinegar. And that is my main issue with you. You can be as you clearly display in the top of your user profile: 60% Griefer.
Hopefully that answers your questions and I'll not hear anymore. But continue with the defamation and harrassment and I'll consider action Ragimund (talk) 07:09, March 16, 2020 (UTC)
If you feel you are being treated unfairly, I encourage you to contact Tephra, the NWN2 Wiki manager, and communicate your specific concerns. If you do, remember: please be civil and polite. Raelind (talk) 22:56, March 16, 2020 (UTC)