Two Shield Other on one person

Hey guys,

According to the Shield Other Spell,

Shield Other:
This spell wards the subject and creates a mystic connection between you and the subject so that some of its wounds are transferred to you. The subject gains a +1 deflection bonus to AC and a +1 resistance bonus on saves. Additionally, the subject takes only half damage from all wounds and attacks (including those dealt by special abilities) that deal hit point damage.

It says that the subject takes only half damage. If the subject has two Shield Other spells active on him, does the damage get split up half and half so that the casters each take half of the total damage, and the subject takes none? Or does one caster take half damage, and the other caster takes half of the remaining damage, so 1/4 of total damage?

The only rule I can find that seems relevant is:

Same Effect with Differing Results

The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts.

(The differing result being 'who the damage goes to'.) In this case, the more recent casting of Shield Other takes precedence, and all the damage goes to him.

It is actually worded so that the recipient of the spell will take half damage and the casters of one or more spells will divide up the rest of the damage.

"the subject takes only half damage from all wounds"

"The amount of damage not taken by the warded creature is taken by you"

So if Fighter is warded by both Cleric and Oracle and fighter takes 30 points of damage, then Fighter takes 15 points and Cleric and Oracle split the other 15 points.

I am not 100% settled on that answer but it seems to lead to that with the phrase "takes only half damage."

It is actually worded so that the recipient of the spell will take half damage and the casters of one or more spells will divide up the rest of the damage.

"the subject takes only half damage from all wounds"

"The amount of damage not taken by the warded creature is taken by you"

So if Fighter is warded by both Cleric and Oracle and fighter takes 30 points of damage, then Fighter takes 15 points and Cleric and Oracle split the other 15 points.

I am not 100% settled on that answer but it seems to lead to that with the phrase "takes only half damage."

Not sure myself, but it does seem plausible. Also, speaking as someone who lost a character because my character had cast shield other on the fighter, who in turn took so much damage in a single round that it was enough to kill my character outright, it would even be a good idea.

It does seem to make sense that the subject takes half, and the casters split the rest. Thanks, guys :)

Actually, Hendelbolaf's quote indicates that in fact the subject takes half and the casters each also take half. By which I mean, suppose you have FighterA, FailedShieldOtherCheeserB, and FailedShieldOtherCheeserC. B and C both cast shield other on A. A takes a hit for 50 damage. In fact, A takes 25, B takes 25, and C takes 25.

Follow up question, If two life oracles have life linked the same target, does the life link stack?

Actually, Hendelbolaf's quote indicates that in fact the subject takes half and the casters each also take half. By which I mean, suppose you have FighterA, FailedShieldOtherCheeserB, and FailedShieldOtherCheeserC. B and C both cast shield other on A. A takes a hit for 50 damage. In fact, A takes 25, B takes 25, and C takes 25.

That is the interpretation that I thought of as well but wanted to avoid. I do not think the spell should cause more than 100% of the damage, but I do not think it should do less either.

I am also not against the idea of having it not able to stack so that the most recent Shield Other is the only one that works. There is a precedence with other spells working like that.

Follow up question, If two life oracles have life linked the same target, does the life link stack?

I second Byrhtnoth's question since I just GM'd him and his brother with their paired Oradins life linking a third character ;)

I temp ruled that last life link would take precedence over the previous one (i.e. only one could be in effect at a time). However, since it's a SU power, I'm not sure if it's held to the same standard as a normal spell.

Any thoughts either way would be welcome!

The only rule I can find that seems relevant is:

Same Effect with Differing Results

The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts.

(The differing result being 'who the damage goes to'.) In this case, the more recent casting of Shield Other takes precedence, and all the damage goes to him.

I have this interpretation also. Otherwise the BBEG having 2 low level clerics would always be a good idea. Even from a crit they would only take 1/4 damage.

I read the forums for bizarre questions like this one. There are several logical paths to take:
(using the example posted above of the fighter, the oracle, and the cleric)
A) The Fighter takes 50% damage, the Oracle takes 50% damage, and the Cleric takes 50% damage.

B) The Fighter takes 25% damage, the first shield other takes 50% damage, the second shield other takes 25% damage.

C) The Fighter takes 25% damage and the cleric and oracle each take 37.5% damage.

D) The Oracle takes 50% damage, the Cleric takes 50% damage, and the fighter is immune to damage temporarily.

E) Each of them take 33% damage.

I, personally, read "Additionally, the subject takes only half damage from all wounds and attacks (including those dealt by special abilities) that deal hit point damage. The amount of damage not taken by the warded creature is taken by you." to mean that the subject takes half damage; the first person who casts shield other takes the remaining damage (50%). The second cast of shield other does nothing as the person already is taking half damage. However, the second caster also takes the remaining damage (50%); thus resulting in the monsters doing more efficient damage (150% damage per swing as each person is taking 50% damage). To me, the answer is A.

Presumably if the cleric casts Shield Other on the fighter and the oracle casts it on the cleric, you'd get the 50% fighter, 25% cleric, 25% oracle situation without the GM having to make a special ruling.

Hrm, I suppose RAW, if two Shield Others are cast on the same person, each character involved would take 50% of the damage dealt, resulting in more efficient damage by the monster. According to the "Same Effect with Differing Results" Rule mentioned earlier, this means that the Shield others can't stack, since I don't think it was intended to in the first place.

Matthew Downie's suggestion of casting them in such a way to make a Shield other Chain, rather than having two cast on one is useful, and something I'll consider for the future. I think we'll call this question solved, unless anyone has further input.