Barkskin

This is a HUGE buff! Before, I never even HEARD of anyonce casting this, but now it might be a common sight among nature classes!

It's practically inevitable, the ability to give anyone a buff to 17 AC will make this spell one of the best.

And it’s not even concentration anymore. This feels like some sort of compensation for nerfing the Circle of the Moon Druid subclass lmao, and I’ll take it

This spell was among some of the most useless ones is now quite nice, its not going to set the world on fire but you can now actually protect someone with it and not be useless in combat because of it.

can someone explain, would this stack with shield spell?  How about with a shield?

I see that in 2014 the wording and ruling wouldn’t allow it, but honestly just reading this and the shield spell it isn’t so clear that they wouldn’t stack

Quote from Googagooga >>

can someone explain, would this stack with shield spell?  How about with a shield?

I would say that since one's AC only changes to 17 if it is less than that at any point in the duration, the player (or the DM if the target is an NPC) would want to keep track of their unmodified AC. Any modifiers would apply to the base AC and only change the target's AC if they cause the base AC to exceed 17. This spell is in essence "checking" every instant during the duration if the target's AC is less than 17 and only modifying it if it is. This contrasts with the Mage Armor spell, which changes the target's base AC. Hope this helps.

Is there a newer sage advice? because the one i find talks about the old version of the spell which has other wording.
As I understand it, the spell acts like a suit of armor, with the difference that you can still benefit of this spell if your armor provides less protection.

When a character takes a suit of plate armor, its AC is 18.
RAW: In the newer version of the spell i don't see anything that prevents further AC buffs like shields and the shield spell, or even cover. If there is an updated sage advice touching that subject, may you link it please?
RAI: It seems pretty counterintuitive to me that effects granting you protection do not stack with further protection. I know this was the case before, but to me it pretty much seems that they addressed that issue.

I know its an older topic by now, but i'd love your more elaborate take on it if you dont mind:) Have a nice day!

thank you for your fast answer:) I definitely see your point and don't think you are wrong.
My table interprets it as a suit of armor and it doesn't feel wrong as well.

I'd appreciate if a newer SAC will be published^^
But as i said, i do get your explanation as well, can't fault either way of seeing it.

Thanks again:)

thank you so much for pointing that out to me:)

Quick question how would it work with for example, natural armor or unarmed defense

This is great for an early to mid-level dual-wielding Ranger, as it makes up for not having a shield.

So basically, this spell can bring your armor class up to 17, but you cannot add regular armor or a mundane shield (exception for the shield spell) to go above a 17, right?