|
Last night, we had one of those moments (again) where we discovered that one of those core assumptions that we all held was possibly wrong. So, what else to do than ask the all-knowing board:
Bonuses of the same kind does not stack, but penalties do. But what about penalties from the same source?
Do multiple Bane spells stack?
Can a witch use Evil Eye on the same enemy round after round, piling up the penalties to, say, AC?
As for the Witch's powers, I can't say (don't own the book).
As for spells...
Spells of the same name don't stack with themselves, they overwrite each other. Only the most recent spell counts.
So, if you Bestow Curse someone's Strength multiple times, there's no additional effect. The same holds true for Bane.
Also, if you Bestow Curse someone first to decrease his Strength and later give him a penalty to all his d20 rolls (so to speak), only the latter will apply.
Hope this helps.
Here's the official cite:
Bonus Types
Usually, a bonus has a type that indicates how the spell grants the bonus. The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don't generally stack. With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus of a given type works (see Combining Magical Effects). The same principle applies to penalties — a character taking two or more penalties of the same type applies only the worst one, although most penalties have no type and thus always stack. Bonuses without a type always stack, unless they are from the same source.
The last sentence of this paragraph references "bonuses" but the sentence before it specifically says "the same principle applies to penalties". This does leave a little room for rules-lawyers to wriggle and squirm and say that only bonuses cannot stack if they're from the same source, but I think the intent of this paragraph is quite clear. Semantically, I would agree that it would have been more clear if the last two sentences were reversed in the order in which they appear, but either way, the meaning is quite clear:
Two or more "typed" penalties of the same type, take the worst one and ignore the rest.
Two or more "untyped" penalties always stack - unless they are from the same source.
Also note the following:
Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases when two or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same target, but at different strengths, only the one with the highest strength applies.
I think the above reasoning applies even if the two spells are the same strength. Otherwise you get the strange situation where two Rays of Enfeeblement don't stack if they give a -4 penalty and a -5 penalty, but they do stack if they give a -4 penalty and a -4 penalty!
The last sentence of this paragraph references "bonuses" but the sentence before it specifically says "the same principle applies to penalties". This does leave a little room for rules-lawyers to wriggle and squirm and say that only bonuses cannot stack if they're from the same source, but I think the intent of this paragraph is quite clear. Semantically, I would agree that it would have been more clear if the last two sentences were reversed in the order in which they appear, but either way, the meaning is quite clear:
Two or more "typed" penalties of the same type, take the worst one and ignore the rest.
Two or more "untyped" penalties always stack - unless they are from the same source.
Thanks for the reference. That is what we thought too, but you know how it is; Sometimes we stare so much at a single rule that we forget where the actual explanation is found.
Anyway, that was the way we enforced it, so no harm no foul.