Cloak of Mists says, "When you suffer 1 or more wounds, roll 1 power die for each wound suffered. Cancel 1 wound for each surge you roll." furthermore the card states that it is "Armour".

Aura says "Enemy figures that move into a space ... suffer 1 wound that cannot be reduced by armor"

So do you roll to save wounds with it? or is the armour ignored? or does that only apply to the armour value and not it's effect?

Also same question but regarding traps that say "ignoring armour"..

Stillborn said:

It seems to be generally taken that the use of armour in this context means 'armour value' rather than 'armour, the equipment'. IIRC there may be a reply from KW. Trying looking through the Gathered List of Answered Questions.

Anyway, the basic answer is that yes, these armours are able to prevent wounds from Aura/Traps etc by rolling dice.

Actually, there have been two replies from KW on that.

First: Cloaks etc. are completely ignored, i.e. do not work against trap, aura etc. damage.

Second: Cloaks work fully against such damage, only the Armor value is ignored.

Rule to your own taste

Parathion said:

Sigh!

Presumably the second ruling takes precedence over the first.

What FFG should have done is always use the term "Armor Value" or something similar, instead of having "Armor" refer to both the item and the armor number.

iirc (don't have the card at hand) it's a normal armor, with the difference it has no armor value. the armor value is decided every time anew by throwing dice. imho it wouldn't work in this case because it's a normal armor which replaces the leather armor etc. the catch is it's still "normal" armor, but the outcome how good it is random.

You're probably thinking of the Tunic shop item from WoD--the Cloak of Mists is a silver item that gives +1 armor and lets you roll dice to cancel armor (there's also a similar copper and gold item).

But you're also mistaken on a couple of particulars. First, these don't just make your defenses random, they also scale to the amount of damage you take--you roll 1 die per wound. Secondly, they don't say that you add your total roll to your armor--they say that you "cancel 1 wound" for each favorable die. So the question isn't that trivial.

The Descent writers assigned two different technical definitions to the same word. "Armor" is both a stat that reduces the damage you take and a type of item. As Skittles said, they should have used different terms for these two concepts, but they didn't, so this is the problem we're stuck with. So when some damage "ignores armor," there are three possible readings:

1. The damage ignores your numerical armor stat.
2. The damage ignores protection from your equipped armor item.
3. The damage ignores both your numerical armor stat and any additional protection from your equipped armor item.

Using a single word to mean two completely different things at the same time is ridiculously bad writing, even for Descent, so option #3 is really extremely unlikely. The writer would have to be very confused to mean that.

Option #2 would mean base armor (from your hero card) and armor from skills or "other" items could still be used against effects that "ignore armor," which would make high-armor heroes very resistant to traps and the like. Most people don't seem to like that idea. Additionally, Corbin, a hero from the Altar of Despair expansion, has the special hero ability that any damage he takes is reduced by 1, even if it ignores armor--if damage that "ignores armor" is still reduced by a hero's base armor, then that ability doesn't make much sense.

So that leaves option #1, which I think is the most reasonable interpretation (and also apparently consistent with the most recent pronouncement from Kevin W, though I did not personally witness either statement).

Antistone said:

Seconded. I've always used Option #1

We've also always used Option #1.

Another area of question could be when the heroes get ambushed in an outdoor encounter and are sleeping. I believe #1 should also be used in this case, just in case there's any controversy.

SkittlesAreYum said:

I would agree since alseep its says that their armor is ignored and treated as zero. So for those cloaks, I guess you would have the armor 0 but still be able to roll for the damage soaking? It makes a strange kind of thematic sense, since you might have the cloak draped over you for warmth at night...okay, I'm reaching here.