Divine protection stack with prophetic armor?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 103 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

6 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Does the charisma bonus from the Divine Protection feat stack with the Charisma bonus from the lunar oracle's Prophetic Armor revelation? Or does this particular oracle get screwed on his Reflex saves?


I don't think they stack according to this FAQ

http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9sgk


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

That FAQ is actually why I asked the question in the first place. It throws doubt on something that would have obviously worked fine otherwise. I doubt the developers were even aware that their FAQ might keep something like this from working. I seriously don't believe this particular combo not working was their intent.

Grand Lodge

I don't think "screwed" is the right term. They don't stack, but they still end up with Charisma to AC and all saves.

And honestly I'm willing to believe it was their intent. The feat isn't made worthless (and is honestly probably to strong to begin with) and not all Mysteries have access to a "Charisma to X" revelation (in fact, only a minority of them do).


It doesn't stack with divine grace so I'll assume they thought about it stacking with other cha to saves abilities.


The feat is hilariously broken to start with, it is good they don't stack. (besides, you are charisma to your Ref save and AC while you are most likely nerfing hard dex, still a strong choice)


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Except this isn't a Charisma to saves ability. This is a Charisma replacing Dexterity to saves ability. Totally different.

It doesn't keep even, as most things do when they don't stack. In regards to the final Reflex save, it's actually LOWER than if I hadn't taken Prophetic Armor at all! (In which case I would have had Dex and Cha to the save.)

I really don't think the developers meant for a FAQ on non-stacking to actually LOWER your numbers rather than keep them even.

Silver Crusade Contributor

Undead antipaladins are in the same boat re: Fortitude, and I believe it was determined somewhere in that whole debacle that they only get Charisma once - despite one "replacing" Constitution.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kalindlara wrote:
Undead antipaladins are in the same boat re: Fortitude, and I believe it was determined somewhere in that whole debacle that they only get Charisma once - despite one "replacing" Constitution.

Can you cite an official source? (Or even an unofficial comment from an official?) Such a precedent would most certainly answer my question.


It's best not to think too hard on the explanation given for the FAQ. It's nonsensicalness will make your brain hurt because of the mental gymnastics you have to do to understand it. Best to just pretend that they are the same typed bonus.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Seems to me like the FAQ obfuscated matters rather than clarified them. What exactly was the original issue it was trying to clear up anyways?

Silver Crusade Contributor

Ravingdork wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Undead antipaladins are in the same boat re: Fortitude, and I believe it was determined somewhere in that whole debacle that they only get Charisma once - despite one "replacing" Constitution.
Can you cite an official source? (Or even an unofficial comment from an official?) Such a precedent would most certainly answer my question.

I was hoping someone else could find the posts - I've been up over twenty-four hours, so I'm a little scrambled. Sorry. ^_^

Silver Crusade Contributor

Ravingdork wrote:
Seems to me like the FAQ obfuscated matters rather than clarified them. What exactly was the original issue it was trying to clear up anyways?

One of the major points of argument was whether Fury's Fall and Agile Maneuvers stacked, I remember that.

I think there was also the oracle/paladin combo (similar to what you're discussing here).

Really, though, I don't know. It's another of those FAQs that I didn't especially agree with, but can understand the logic behind.

Silver Crusade Contributor

Does this link work?

If so, those four posts might be a good place to start.

Grand Lodge

Kalindlara wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Seems to me like the FAQ obfuscated matters rather than clarified them. What exactly was the original issue it was trying to clear up anyways?

One of the major points of argument was whether Fury's Fall and Agile Maneuvers stacked, I remember that.

I think there was also the oracle/paladin combo (similar to what you're discussing here).

Really, though, I don't know. It's another of those FAQs that I didn't especially agree with, but can understand the logic behind.

There was also the Monk/Sacred Fist AC bonus thing.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Wow. Seems like it's caused more problems than it solved. (Again, what was it trying to solve?)

Silver Crusade Contributor

Jeff Merola wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Seems to me like the FAQ obfuscated matters rather than clarified them. What exactly was the original issue it was trying to clear up anyways?

One of the major points of argument was whether Fury's Fall and Agile Maneuvers stacked, I remember that.

I think there was also the oracle/paladin combo (similar to what you're discussing here).

Really, though, I don't know. It's another of those FAQs that I didn't especially agree with, but can understand the logic behind.

There was also the Monk/Sacred Fist AC bonus thing.

I thought that was exempt due to the Sacred Fist gaining a deflection bonus, but I checked again - only the level-based increase is a deflection bonus. So, yeah. That too.

Good catch! ^_^


I think it's pretty clear - it doesn't stack. I had to remove the 2x bonus on my oracle.


I believe they stack.

FAQ wrote:

Do ability modifiers from the same ability stack? For instance, can you add the same ability bonus on the same roll twice using two different effects that each add that same ability modifier?

No. An ability bonus, such as "Strength bonus", is considered to be the same source for the purpose of bonuses from the same source not stacking. However, you can still add, for instance “a deflection bonus equal to your Charisma modifier” and your Charisma modifier. For this purpose, however, the paladin's untyped "bonus equal to her Charisma bonus (if any) on all saving throws" from divine grace is considered to be the same as "Charisma bonus (if any)", and the same would be true for any other untyped "bonus equal to her [ability score] bonus" constructions.

I interpret that divine protection is an untyped bonus to reflex saves and prophetic armor is dexterity bonus to reflex saves.

As far as I understand same type/category bonus from one ability score does not stack, but different do.

Ravingdork wrote:
Wow. Seems like it's caused more problems than it solved. (Again, what was it trying to solve?)

Probably sacred fist warpriest and monk multiclass double WIS AC bonus.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Ravingdork wrote:
Seems to me like the FAQ obfuscated matters rather than clarified them. What exactly was the original issue it was trying to clear up anyways?

They intended to fix:

Double Dex to Damage.
Agile Maneuvers and Fury's Fall (a direct parallel to your OP question)
Other things that might end up with the same ability applied twice to anything.

Ravingdork wrote:

Except this isn't a Charisma to saves ability. This is a Charisma replacing Dexterity to saves ability. Totally different.

Similar to Agile Maneuvers and Fury's Fall, I think they don't agree with your distinction. It is a Cha to Saves and Cha to Reflex, which won't stack.

Lantern Lodge

Ravingdork wrote:

Except this isn't a Charisma to saves ability. This is a Charisma replacing Dexterity to saves ability. Totally different.

It doesn't keep even, as most things do when they don't stack. In regards to the final Reflex save, it's actually LOWER than if I hadn't taken Prophetic Armor at all! (In which case I would have had Dex and Cha to the save.)

I really don't think the developers meant for a FAQ on non-stacking to actually LOWER your numbers rather than keep them even.

I feel your pain Ravingdork. The faq is a banhammer that affected too many builds in order to fix issues with a couple of broken builds. And is not too clear on all the cases, which leads to a ton of confusion.

On the topic of "Divine Protection feat stack with the Charisma bonus from the lunar oracle's Prophetic Armor revelation", unfortunately I don't think they stack. Namely both seems to be untyped, aka just flat out Cha bonus to reflex save.

My PFS Paladin-Lore Oracle got affected this and I had retrain him.


Ravingdork wrote:
Wow. Seems like it's caused more problems than it solved. (Again, what was it trying to solve?)

Things like Fury's Fall combined with Weapon Finesse/Agile Maneuvers.

There are also a few different ways to add Int to damage.

It's essentially designed to shut down SAD optimization.


TheTheos: No, both are untyped. They do, however have multiple sources, and among those multiple sources they both include Charisma as one of them. The easy and sensible option was to make ability bonuses typed. They opted for a more complicated and unnecessarily convoluted option because they didn't want to edit the rule book with a single line.


Did some search-fu and I found out that James Jacobs believes two ability modifiers shouldn't stack in the scenario when X modifier replaces Y modifier and is added as a bonus.
I guess I should note that this posts are a bit old and that The Great and Mighty JJ's opinion sometimes doesn't agree with Rules team.
Links:
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l7ns&page=444?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Qu estions-Here#22160

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l7ns&page=386?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Qu estions-Here#19274

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l7ns&page=385?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Qu estions-Here#19247

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Interesting, this directly involved one of my characters:

My Rise of the Runelords Oracle 15 with Divine Protection and Lunar Mystery.

I didn't operate with them stacking prior to the FAQ, so it didn't change my character.


it wont stack. untyped bonus to saves.
now if this makes sense or not is not the point of raw.

i do believe that the final straw on double dipping stats was the sacred fist/monk threads about their wis to ac bonus (one su the other ex and etc) that kinda flooded the forums immediatly prior to the faq's release and i do think that the faq doesn't make sense for things like undead, but for cha stacking, especially on oracle, i couldn't care less, the class is already sad as hell and can get cha to like everything, from initiative, to saves, to ac (2-3 times stacking) to etcetc, so i do believe it was also RAI for those kinds of builds.


The FAQ is explicit - the modifier does not stack with itself, even if it's modifier + bonus.

For the same reason Irrepressible + Steadfast + Charmed Life doesn't give you 3xCha to your Will save, Divine Protection won't stack with Prophetic Armor, even though one replaces and one adds. (Believe me, I REALLY WANTED this to work and it just doesn't.)


The FAQ overrules common sense. If you replace one with another, it isn't adding a bonus to another bonus, it is exchanging the bonus source from one ability score to another. If the ability score is reduced to where it imposes a penalty, depending on the wording of how the other effects are worded, that penalty applies doubly so.

Untyped bonuses are supposed to stack with each other, that's the whole point of untyped bonuses.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Turin the Mad wrote:

The FAQ overrules common sense. If you replace one with another, it isn't adding a bonus to another bonus, it is exchanging the bonus source from one ability score to another.

My thoughts exactly!

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Turin the Mad wrote:
The FAQ overrules common sense.

That is the thing about common sense, it isn't common.

There hasn't been much doubt on these types of subjects (DEX to CMB from two sources) for years. Many posts from JJ. Posts from Michael Brock strongly advising not to do double Dex to damage or when the errata arrived there would be no retraining to fix the character (it would be unplayable).

So while you feel that the decision didn't make any sense. Most of the other side (including the rules team) feel that it didn't make any sense to have them stack. To them it was common sense "of course they don't stack".

Silver Crusade Contributor

To be fair, Michael Brock's warning about Pistolero/Mysterious Stranger had little to do with this FAQ - that was more about an obvious class-feature replacement and a misworded archetype.

Still common sense, though.


James Risner wrote:
To them it was common sense "of course they don't stack".

I hope this isn't the case. I hope they thought there was some kind of balance issue and they shouldn't stack for that reason. If the other side REALLY thought that it was "common sense" for untyped bonuses* to not stack, I'm playing a different game than they are. :P

* to be clear, THAT'S what the FAQ says. Sometimes for... reasons, untyped bonuses don't stack, you know when they have multiple sources...


i'm pretty sure they just thought that double (or triple, quadruple and etc) dipping on the same stat for the same bonus is too much.

once again, exemtions need to be made (like in undead), but i guess it would be easier to just errata the bonuses they want to stack with a type (insight? racial?) than to just make it so that all the new ones don't stack.

something along the lines of "ok, when we don't want them to double dip just leave it untyped, when we don't care that much we just give it a type"


shroudb wrote:


something along the lines of "ok, when we don't want them to double dip just leave it untyped, when we don't care that much we just give it a type"

If they'd have said "we're making stat bonuses a type (IE, bonuses from dex are dex bonuses)" and made things they wanted to stack an untyped bonuses equal to the stat bonus, I don't think you'd hear as much grumbling. That's simple and easy to understand.

While there are some that didn't like the ruling, I think many more disliked HOW the ruling was made. Instead of a surgical strike, they carpet bombed the whole thing and then made up new rules to explain it... I'm in that group.

If you think something is broken, fix it in the right way. In the long run it's the best way to avoid problems.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

graystone wrote:
If the other side REALLY thought that it was "common sense" for untyped bonuses* to not stack, I'm playing a different game than they are.

Isn't that what they said? It doesn't and never stacked because they are coming from the same "source" (the ability.) Or did I miss-remember all the threads and the FAQ post itself?

As for you playing a different game, I'm pretty sure you are. Which is fine. You are entitled to your interpretation of the rules, to your ability to change the rules with rule 0, and more.

So it is likely we all are playing different games.

graystone wrote:
If you think something is broken, fix it in the right way. In the long run it's the best way to avoid problems.

In their mind, they probably did fix it the right way. Hey we noticed this didn't work the way we expected/wanted/wrote. Let's fix this in a general way that can be applied to all things similar, including things we didn't think of right now.

Shadow Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

It doesn't keep even, as most things do when they don't stack. In regards to the final Reflex save, it's actually LOWER than if I hadn't taken Prophetic Armor at all! (In which case I would have had Dex and Cha to the save.)

I really don't think the developers meant for a FAQ on non-stacking to actually LOWER your numbers rather than keep them even.

It doesn't lower your numbers.

Prophetic Armor wrote:
You are so in tune with your primal nature that your instincts often act to save you from danger that your civilized mind isn't even aware of. You may use your Charisma modifier (instead of your Dexterity modifier) as part of your Armor Class and all Reflex saving throws. Your armor's maximum Dexterity bonus applies to your Charisma, instead.

"May" means that you have the option not to do something. So you can continue to use your Dex to reflex while using the revelation to add Cha to AC instead of Dex.

You're also assuming that an oracle with this revelation will have a Dex bonus they're missing out on, and many (most?) won't, since they're taking the revelation specifically to avoid needing a good dex. The lore oracle in my party has Dex 10. I've seen builds on the forum that dump Dex to 7.


graystone wrote:
Instead of a surgical strike, they carpet bombed the whole thing and then made up new rules to explain it

This has been a consistent problem with Paizo FAQs for years. They're too fond of taking a sledgehammer to the rules when a scalpel will do.

Of course, part of the issue is that with their baffling errata policy it's a lot easier to make up massively sweeping unwritten rules than it is to change a single line of book text.


James Risner wrote:
graystone wrote:
If the other side REALLY thought that it was "common sense" for untyped bonuses* to not stack, I'm playing a different game than they are.

Isn't that what they said? It doesn't and never stacked because they are coming from the same "source" (the ability.) Or did I miss-remember all the threads and the FAQ post itself?

As for you playing a different game, I'm pretty sure you are. Which is fine. You are entitled to your interpretation of the rules, to your ability to change the rules with rule 0, and more.

So it is likely we all are playing different games.

graystone wrote:
If you think something is broken, fix it in the right way. In the long run it's the best way to avoid problems.
In their mind, they probably did fix it the right way. Hey we noticed this didn't work the way we expected/wanted/wrote. Let's fix this in a general way that can be applied to all things similar, including things we didn't think of right now.

You must have missed something. They said that the bonus had multiple sources. Please point out ANYPLACE in the rules that is possible or even hinted at as possible. it's a completely manufactured new rule bolted on the the existing rules when an existing rule could have been used to 'fix' it. (typing ability bonuses).

That is my point on playing a different game. they are using rules we just don't have as this is another showing of unwritten rules like hands of effort. I expect ruling to be made WITH the rules or new rules be printed. Using unknown rules (multiple sources and hands of effort) is using a different set of rules than the rest of us have. it's not cool.

As to fixed the right way: Even Mark didn't seem to like the way this issue was fixed and agreed that making it a type was what he was pushing for and that it broke things like undead which he said it's shouldn't do. The way it is now is FAR from the right way to do it. it's just bad anyway you look at it. To be clear, this isn't me saying ANYTHING on stacking but purely on the method used to 'fix' it. It's just bad, awful wrong.

Chengar Qordath: Yes, all these mental gymnastics JUST to avoid some editing is mind boggling..


typing bonuses as "ability bonus" would mess with existing abilities that actually have a type, like p.e. steadfast personality, or osyluth's guile, or arshea's 2nd obedience and etc


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
shroudb wrote:
typing bonuses as "ability bonus" would mess with existing abilities that actually have a type, like p.e. steadfast personality, or osyluth's guile, or arshea's 2nd obedience and etc

No, that was actually addressed in the FAQ. If you gain a typed bonus that happens to be equal to an ability score modifier, that does stack with ability score bonuses for the same ability score. The problematic combination is two or more untyped ability score bonuses for the same ability score to the same game element.


Ravingdork wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:

The FAQ overrules common sense. If you replace one with another, it isn't adding a bonus to another bonus, it is exchanging the bonus source from one ability score to another.

My thoughts exactly!

Penalties stack, bonuses of different types stack, and bonuses of the same type don't stack except for dodge and sometimes circumstance bonuses. Common sense was already out the window before the question about ability bonuses arose.

Let us examine why bonuses of the same type do not stack and see if that reason would apply to ability bonuses.

What happens if a fighter puts chainmail (armor bonus +6) over padded armor (armor bonus +1)? In medieval times, many soldiers did that, because the padded armor helped protect against bludgeoning weapons. Does that make a +7 armor bonus? No, because armor bonuses don't stack with each other. If we allowed armor combinations, wearing armor would become too complicated. Besides, maybe that +6 bonus for the chainmal already counts padding under it.

The game simulates a world where a character wears one suit of armor. Armor not stacking reflects that. In contrast, we do let shields stack with armor by giving shields a shield bonus to AC instead, because many fighters used armor and shields together.

Spells would be another source of unrealistic stacking. Two +4 enhancement bonuses to Strength from a pair of Bull's Strength spells stacking to +8 is obviously overpowered. But spell stacking would also affect roleplaying. If Magic Weapon spells stacked with themselves, that would lead to the weird situations of the wizard stacking spells on top of a weapon right before the party rushes in to a room. Roleplaying is smoother with the spellcaster gradually using up spells rather than saving them for one nova burst. If Magic Weapon stacked with Greater Magic Weapon but not with itself, that would have a smiliar though more minor effect. Thus, similar spells often have the same bonus type to prevent stacking with each other.

Divine Protection was designed to let other divine classes mimic a paladin's Divine Grace class ability, so it does not fully stack with Divine Grace. I am surprised it has a partial +1 stacking, but that might be to avoid writing another paladin-only feat called Improved Divine Grace.

graystone wrote:
While there are some that didn't like the ruling, I think many more disliked HOW the ruling was made. Instead of a surgical strike, they carpet bombed the whole thing and then made up new rules to explain it... I'm in that group.

The original same-types-don't-stack rule was a carpet bombing. It is a general principle so that the rule designers did not have to sift through all the bonuses for individual cases where stacking would be bad. Armor bonuses not stacking not only prevents double suits of armor, but it also prevents combining a suit of armor and Mage Armor and Bracers of Armor.

Ability bonuses have become common. Therefore, like the type bonuses, searching for interactions is too difficult when writing rules. Hence, they get carpet bombed, too.


Then we get to the original question: Does the charisma bonus from the Divine Protection feat stack with the Charisma bonus from the lunar oracle's Prophetic Armor revelation?

Prophetic Armor (Ex) wrote:
You are so in tune with your primal nature that your instincts often act to save you from danger that your civilized mind isn't even aware of. You may use your Charisma modifier (instead of your Dexterity modifier) as part of your Armor Class and all Reflex saving throws. Your armor's maximum Dexterity bonus applies to your Charisma, instead.

I hope the lunar oracle using Prophetic Armor does not fight any rogues, because she denies herself her Dexterity bonus to AC. And she loses her dodge bonuses, too. On the other hand, at least her AC won't be lowered by other effects that deny Dex to AC, such as flatfooted or fooled by a feint.

Ravingdork wrote:
Except this isn't a Charisma to saves ability. This is a Charisma replacing Dexterity to saves ability. Totally different.

I agree, with the empahsis that "replacing" means Charisma is acting in the role of Dexterity. The oracle did not lose her Dexterity bonus to AC and reflex saves and gain a Charisma bonus to them. Instead, a number from her Charisma score has been substituted for a number from her Dexterity score, but it is still a Dexterity bonus. But the wording does not reflect that intent.

The theme for Prophetic Armor is that the oracle's reflexes are precognative so that the oracle does not depend on her reaction time. The better the oracle's spellcasting bonus, the better the precognition. But the Charisma bonus to AC and to reflex saves is still the same old dodging by dexterity at the last second.

Prophetic Armor should be corrected to:

Prophetic Armor Corrected (Ex) wrote:
You are so in tune with your primal nature that your instincts often act to save you from danger that your civilized mind isn't even aware of. You may increase your Dexterity modifier for your Armor Class and all Reflex saving throws to equal your Charisma modifier, if it is greater.

That wording is even shorter.

And by that wording, Prophetic Armor would stack with Divine Protection.


One is a bonus and the other a replacement. Whats the problem?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

graystone wrote:
I expect ruling to be made WITH the rules or new rules be printed

This is really where you and I are playing a different game. I don't agree they made up something new on this. I think the rules always told us they didn't stack prior to the FAQ. The FAQ just makes it abundantly clear and tries to explain it a little better with some hand waving.


James Risner wrote:
graystone wrote:
I expect ruling to be made WITH the rules or new rules be printed
This is really where you and I are playing a different game. I don't agree they made up something new on this. I think the rules always told us they didn't stack prior to the FAQ. The FAQ just makes it abundantly clear and tries to explain it a little better with some hand waving.

You keep saying this, except the FAQratta had to explicitly change Divine Grace to also not stack. There was no direct equivalency between a "bonus" and a "bonus equal to" previously, and in fact, there still isn't except in the case of untyped bonuses.

It's a clear change to the existing rule, even if most of the rest of the "conflicts" could reasonably be expected to be disallowed based on the overall RAI views of the PDT.


David knott 242 wrote:
shroudb wrote:
typing bonuses as "ability bonus" would mess with existing abilities that actually have a type, like p.e. steadfast personality, or osyluth's guile, or arshea's 2nd obedience and etc

No, that was actually addressed in the FAQ. If you gain a typed bonus that happens to be equal to an ability score modifier, that does stack with ability score bonuses for the same ability score. The problematic combination is two or more untyped ability score bonuses for the same ability score to the same game element.

I know. I was just addressing the poster above me who thought that it would be simpler to make stat bonuses named as "dexterity bonus" and etc instead of untyped


The trick is that Dexterity bonus to AC effectively is a typed bonus. Prophetic Armor changes the source of "Dexterity bonus to AC". Untyped bonuses always stack, as do dodge bonuses, circumstance bonuses and racial bonuses (this last is caveated by 'if memory serves').

The simplest solution would be to classify Dexterity and any analogous bonuses as a dodge bonus to AC and be done with it. That would have been too easy. ;)

Instead of worrying about 'denying Dex bonus to AC', one needs to deny 'dodge bonus to AC'. *pouf*, problems solved.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Archaeik wrote:
You keep saying this, except the FAQratta had to explicitly change Divine Grace to also not stack.

I can't even follow what you are saying. I'm not entirely sure you followed what I said either. I'll try again.

In 2009, some felt that when Ability A said "Cha to AC" the source was Cha. So when some other ability said "Cha to AC", the same source didn't stack.


From my perspective, I like to think of it this way.

What is read as "a bonus to X equal to your Y modifier" is intended to be "a modifier bonus to your X"

Any "modifier bonus" is meant to be of type "modifier"

Paizo decided that it was a bad idea to let a 20 point stat somehow give a +10 (or more!) bonus to something silly, and it would feel a bit targeted and inconsistent if they didn't nuke the ability to do so entirely. Thus, they addressed every version of an ability bonus that didn't explicitly state there was a type and assigned a type to it.

Pretend, for example, that they only said in the FAQ: "you can't add your wisdom modifier to your AC twice." Sure that targets one silly thing, but now a precedent has been set. Pretty soon people would be asking on the forums "Why can't I do this? The bonuses are untyped, so the FAQ is just disallowing it for what reason?" and "What about X situation? It's unclear to me, but this FAQ calls out this other situation so I would think it's not allowed."

The purpose of the FAQ is to clear up confusion, and I think what they did for this particular question is perfectly executed, even if some people don't like what they see.


James Risner wrote:
Archaeik wrote:
You keep saying this, except the FAQratta had to explicitly change Divine Grace to also not stack.

I can't even follow what you are saying. I'm not entirely sure you followed what I said either. I'll try again.

In 2009, some felt that when Ability A said "Cha to AC" the source was Cha. So when some other ability said "Cha to AC", the same source didn't stack.

The distinction is specifically about "a bonus equal to".

The FAQ redefined untyped bonuses of this description to no longer stack with other untyped of the same description or direct modifier bonuses.

1 to 50 of 103 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Divine protection stack with prophetic armor? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.