|
Looking to see if there's any formal clarification (or reasonably ponderously heavy consensus) about adding under PF rules. Multiplying is codified, as adding multipliers doesn't necessarily intuitively make sense if you use a raw mathematical perspective. (example: double plus double equals triple, NOT quadruple under PF rules)
So similarly, mathematically speaking whether you add then subtract or subtract then add doesn't make any difference.. but it does under pathfinder. Most game systems that bother to codify always seem to agree that one should add then subtract, should the order matter.
PF never says (that I've seen, anyhoo).
Purely esoteric?
Not so much. One practical example: A ranger gets an animal companion at -4 character level. Boon companion treats his level as 4 levels higher.
So, does a ranger (single classed, to make this example clear) get no benefit from the +4 character level, capping at his character level, because he's always at -4 character level? Or does the -4 character level get cancelled out by the +4 character level, allowing the ranger to have a animal companion equal to his level?
Lots of other interactions are possible, this is NOT purely a ranger/boon companion thread.
For the boon companion example in particular, it (more than) cancels out leaving a full level companion. Also, rangers get it at class level - 3.
What other interactions are you thinking of?
Stacking refers to the act of adding together bonuses or penalties that apply to one particular check or statistic. Generally speaking, most bonuses of the same type do not stack. Instead, only the highest bonus applies. Most penalties do stack, meaning that their values are added together. Penalties and bonuses generally stack with one another, meaning that the penalties might negate or exceed part or all of the bonuses, and vice versa.
Always make sure any penalties are paid for.
|
|
For the boon companion example in particular, it (more than) cancels out leaving a full level companion. To be honest, I find that to be pretty obvious. Also, rangers get it at class level - 3.
What other interactions are you thinking of?
Well, it's only obvious if one assumes that one subtracts first then adds, or if one is allowed to pick whether to add first or subtract first based upon which is more advantageous.
If you add then subtract, the ranger is STILL stuck at -3 character level (thanks for the correction), no matter how many bonuses he gets elswhere because the the 3 level penalty was subtracted last.
It's not a question of stacking modifiers... subtle difference but a big one. Another example is magical knack and delayed casters (such as paladins). Do you add the +2 CL before or after applying their level penalties? As Frankthedm noted, the penalties can be potentially avoided, that's another way of saying one must subtract penalties last after all additions.
Is he right? I suspect he is.
in the case of boon companion, the Devs (jason i believe) stated it allows a ranger to get his full level for animal comps, negating the -3
You're thinking of this, I believe. It was SKR and it's official errata.
As Edgar said, you do all the math, then look at the result. If that result is above a stated cap (such as "No more than 10d6 dice"), then it is capped at that. But it's better read as "I have 12d6 dice, of which I can only use 10d6".
Not so much. One practical example: A ranger gets an animal companion at -4 character level. Boon companion treats his level as 4 levels higher.
So, does a ranger (single classed, to make this example clear) get no benefit from the +4 character level, capping at his character level, because he's always at -4 character level? Or does the -4 character level get cancelled out by the +4 character level, allowing the ranger to have a animal companion equal to his level?
Lots of other interactions are possible, this is NOT purely a ranger/boon companion thread.
Why would it not apply? the problem here isn't whether you add or subtract first.
Take a 7th level ranger/4th level fighter. I use the multclassing so the character level cap isn't hit and you're receiving the full benefit for boon companion, because I think it's clearer.
(and as cheapy stated it's -3, not -4)
Option one: Your animal companion is level 7, -3 because you're a ranger(4), +4 because of boon companion(8)
Option two: (your animal companion is level 7, +4 because of boon companion (11), -3 because you're a ranger (8)
Without multiclassing it's
7(class level) -3 (ranger modifier) +4 (BC) for 8, but capped at 7 *OR*
7(class level) +4 (BC) -3 (ranger) for 8, but capped at 7.
Your confusion isn't from the order in which you do it. You seem to be treating the level of an animal companion of a ranger as a constant (or perhaps capped at) class level -3. That's not stated in the rules. It's just that you subtract 3 from your class level and then apply that to the druid chart. Any other modifiers, traits, feats, etc., would still apply. Or there would be some line in the rules about "the effective level of a ranger in determining the abilities of his animal companion can never exceed his ranger level -3."
EDIT: The same applies on your paladin example: level 7 paladin, caster level 4 +2 for 6, or 7+2-3 for 6.
|
|
Well, the 'add all modifiers together before applying' approach seems to make sense.. honestly that's a great use of these forums.. getting other people's perspective.
One apprehension I have however is if one has modifiers in place, then adds new modifier(s) during play, mechanically you then have to unapply prior modifiers then reapply them all. Can't think of a situation off the top of my head where that would be an issue, but it seems it potentially could.
One apprehension I have however is if one has modifiers in place, then adds new modifier(s) during play, mechanically you then have to unapply prior modifiers then reapply them all. Can't think of a situation off the top of my head where that would be an issue, but it seems it potentially could.
Why? Just apply the new modifiers on top of the prior result, then cap as necessary.