For those of you who are still trying to harp the whole "Well JJ said this!!!" train, I would like to introduce you to his opinion on using him for rules issues
Your welcome and good night :)
That is not new around here. People just ignore it when he post something that aligns with their argument. If we find another post where he has had a differing opinion on the same topic, even if it is more current it somehow does not matter.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am of the opinion that a bonus is not a source. In the way that a source of income is not the money itself. It is the institution that provides the money.
Its a logical conclusion and unless the devs outright says it doesnt work that way, then that is how the world works.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think I've read that "ability" is the source for anything, ever.
I've always seen stuff like...
"this gives a +X DODGE bonus to your AC" or
"this gives a +Y MORALE bonus to your damage" or
"this gives a +Z CIRCUMSTANCE bonus to your attack role"
I always figured that if it did not directly specify a kind of bonus(i.e. dodge, morale, circumstance, luck, etc.) then it was an untyped bonus by default, and that the source of the untyped bonus was automatically set as the feat or ability that it came from.
Just my 2 cents :P
|
I agree, so if a rule says "apply your whole DEXTERITY bonus to your Armor Class", should I not conclude that that is a typed bonus and its type is Dexterity?
|
|
I agree, so if a rule says "apply your whole DEXTERITY bonus to your Armor Class", should I not conclude that that is a typed bonus and its type is Dexterity?
Not necessarily.
It applies your Dex modifier, which may or may not be equal to your whole Dex bonus, if any. And there are abilities that can change even that. Some replace your Dex mod with a different stat's mod, others add another stat's mod to the Dex mod for the total AC bonus from stat(s).
Indeed, I could see an Oracle/Magus build that never goes near their Dex mod for AC, using Charisma and Intelligence, instead.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree, so if a rule says "apply your whole DEXTERITY bonus to your Armor Class", should I not conclude that that is a typed bonus and its type is Dexterity?
"Dexterity" is not a bonus type. Only certain bonuses have a type. If it is not one specifically called out by PF then it is an untyped bonus.
Ability is a type of bonus.
Ability is a type of bonus.
No it isn't. All of the bonus types are actually named in the game. I just don't remember which book. I think it is Ultimate Magic when they are discussing the creation of spells, or it might be Ultimate Campaign.
|
I agree, so if a rule says "apply your whole DEXTERITY bonus to your Armor Class", should I not conclude that that is a typed bonus and its type is Dexterity?"Dexterity" is not a bonus type. Only certain bonuses have a type. If it is not one specifically called out by PF then it is an untyped bonus.
Show me the language in the Core Rulebook that calls out any type.
|
|
Ability is a type of bonus.No it isn't. All of the bonus types are actually named in the game. I just don't remember which book. I think it is Ultimate Magic when they are discussing the creation of spells, or it might be Ultimate Campaign.
The list you refer to is in Ultimate Magic. But that is not a comprehensive list, because it does not include ability bonuses or trait bonuses. Its a list for designing spells.
Secondly, its in ultimate magic. The game is intended that I can play it with the core rulebook only. So where in that book is there a list! There isn't.
Thirdly, v3.5 lists ability bonuses as a type.
The reason there is no value prefixing <ability> bonus, is because the bonus is variable based on who's ability you are referring to.
Or, to give another example, "A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object." When we say a Medium Longsword, we aren't saying the Longsword is medium (size as an object); we are saying the Longsword is designed to be wielded by a Medium creature (size category). Its size as an object would actually be Small (useful if targeting an unattended Longsword, it gains an AC bonus based on being a Small sized object).
LOL Anything with bonus in it MUST be a type. That means that attack bonus, BAB and save bonuses are all types and you only take the highest when you multiclass... Or you can go with types only being those bonuses actually called out as such. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm still waiting for a good response to mysterious stranger/pistilaro fiasco that forced errata from the devs since it most definitively worked.I think you may have to wait a long time. I wouldn't hold your breath or put off anything important.
If they responded to that they might have to think about how hp's work by adding your con bonus multiple times...
Ability is a type of bonus.No it isn't. All of the bonus types are actually named in the game. I just don't remember which book. I think it is Ultimate Magic when they are discussing the creation of spells, or it might be Ultimate Campaign.The list you refer to is in Ultimate Magic. But that is not a comprehensive list, because it does not include ability bonuses or trait bonuses. Its a list for designing spells.
Secondly, its in ultimate magic. The game is intended that I can play it with the core rulebook only. So where in that book is there a list! There isn't.
Thirdly, v3.5 lists ability bonuses as a type.
The reason there is no value prefixing <ability> bonus, is because the bonus is variable based on who's ability you are referring to.
3.5 does not have ability as a bonus type, and your other post I am saying that Pathfinder has named every type of bonus that has a name. You can't just go applying your own names to them. There is a list on D20pfsrd which I see someone has linked to.
I do have the 3.5 player's handbook. The glossary in the back is in alphabetical order. It goes from "ability", to "ability check". "Ability Bonus" is not listed.
edit: I see Kazaan has already handled this.
Where, precisely, does it state in the rules that every bonus must have a type? It certainly states that most bonuses have a type, but it also says that untyped bonuses don't conflict as far as stacking goes. BAB isn't a bonus of the "base attack" type, it is an untyped bonus.Or, to give another example, "A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object." When we say a Medium Longsword, we aren't saying the Longsword is medium (size as an object); we are saying the Longsword is designed to be wielded by a Medium creature (size category). Its size as an object would actually be Small (useful if targeting an unattended Longsword, it gains an AC bonus based on being a Small sized object).LOL Anything with bonus in it MUST be a type. That means that attack bonus, BAB and save bonuses are all types and you only take the highest when you multiclass... Or you can go with types only being those bonuses actually called out as such. :P
I thought he was being sarcastic, but it is hard to read intent online sometimes.
I thought he was being sarcastic, but it is hard to read intent online sometimes.Where, precisely, does it state in the rules that every bonus must have a type? It certainly states that most bonuses have a type, but it also says that untyped bonuses don't conflict as far as stacking goes. BAB isn't a bonus of the "base attack" type, it is an untyped bonus.Or, to give another example, "A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object." When we say a Medium Longsword, we aren't saying the Longsword is medium (size as an object); we are saying the Longsword is designed to be wielded by a Medium creature (size category). Its size as an object would actually be Small (useful if targeting an unattended Longsword, it gains an AC bonus based on being a Small sized object).LOL Anything with bonus in it MUST be a type. That means that attack bonus, BAB and save bonuses are all types and you only take the highest when you multiclass... Or you can go with types only being those bonuses actually called out as such. :P
Yep, wraithstrike is correct. Andrew Christian is under the impression that every bonus is typed by default and it has to say it's untyped. I was attempting to show how silly it was by showing how doing so breaks multiclassing.
|
|
Ability is a type of bonus.No it isn't. All of the bonus types are actually named in the game. I just don't remember which book. I think it is Ultimate Magic when they are discussing the creation of spells, or it might be Ultimate Campaign.The list you refer to is in Ultimate Magic. But that is not a comprehensive list, because it does not include ability bonuses or trait bonuses. Its a list for designing spells.
Secondly, its in ultimate magic. The game is intended that I can play it with the core rulebook only. So where in that book is there a list! There isn't.
Thirdly, v3.5 lists ability bonuses as a type.
The reason there is no value prefixing <ability> bonus, is because the bonus is variable based on who's ability you are referring to.
3.5 does not have ability as a bonus type, and your other post I am saying that Pathfinder has named every type of bonus that has a name. You can't just go applying your own names to them. There is a list on D20pfsrd which I see someone has linked to.
I do have the 3.5 player's handbook. The glossary in the back is in alphabetical order. It goes from "ability", to "ability check". "Ability Bonus" is not listed.
edit: I see Kazaan has already handled this.
Sure it does. On phone now, but I linked to the 3.5 SRD in another post that shows 3.5 considered it a bonus type.
|
|
Yep, wraithstrike is correct. Andrew Christian is under the impression that every bonus is typed by default and it has to say it's untyped. I was attempting to show how silly it was by showing how doing so breaks multiclassing.I thought he was being sarcastic, but it is hard to read intent online sometimes.Where, precisely, does it state in the rules that every bonus must have a type? It certainly states that most bonuses have a type, but it also says that untyped bonuses don't conflict as far as stacking goes. BAB isn't a bonus of the "base attack" type, it is an untyped bonus.Or, to give another example, "A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object." When we say a Medium Longsword, we aren't saying the Longsword is medium (size as an object); we are saying the Longsword is designed to be wielded by a Medium creature (size category). Its size as an object would actually be Small (useful if targeting an unattended Longsword, it gains an AC bonus based on being a Small sized object).LOL Anything with bonus in it MUST be a type. That means that attack bonus, BAB and save bonuses are all types and you only take the highest when you multiclass... Or you can go with types only being those bonuses actually called out as such. :P
I'll be better able to respond to this when I am at home and not on phone. But suffice to say, your argument is distracting from the rule. When you have a general rule like bonus stacking, and a more specific rule tells you to do so differently, then the specific trumps general.
So all arguments about multiclassing and 1-1/2 strength bonus to damage with a two hander, are moot, because those are more specific rules for how this paradigms work outside the general rule.
BonusThis is not a valid list as it comes from a third party site.
Coming from the PFSRD does not make it invalid, and all of those bonus types are actually listed in the PRD. However no bonus types outside of those exist. That is the complete list. It is everything in Ultimate Magic, plus any named bonuses outside of Ultimate Magic. "I don't like your source" does not refute a point. What is on the site is no different than me going through the PRD and listing them for you here, and yes someone did do that in another post, and it matched up with the PFSRD list.
Bonus
Yeah, I was looking for something like that on the paizo prd website.
I found this: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ultimateMagic/magic/designingSpells.html #bonus-types
It doesn't list 'trait' as a kind of bonus though, nor does it list 'ability' as a kind of bonus surprisingly :P
However, I believe the book that introduced traits specifically outlined 'trait' as a kind of bonus.
To date I don't think I've ever read that 'ability' is its own kind of bonus. I've only ever read ability scores being applied as a specific type of bonus such as in the lists mentioned above.
I personally don't like the idea of assuming an unnamed 'ability' bonus type should be applied to every reference of ability score bonus that does not specify a direct type, rather than using the established rule that if a bonus type is not specified then it is untyped.
If they put in a clause somewhere that said something along the lines of this:
Most story feat bonuses are untyped, and stack with almost any other bonus. However, if you have multiple story feats, their untyped bonuses do not stack with each other. For example, if two story feats gave you a bonus on saving throws, you would add only the higher bonus.
But if they changed the wording to read, "...If you have multiple feats with untyped ability score bonuses, those untyped bonuses do not stack with each other..."
Then I would say yeah, untyped ability score bonuses from different feats do not stack.
Otherwise you're making some kind of if-then-else statement that says, "If an ability score bonus has a type(i.e. dodge, circumstance, morale, etc) then it is of that type, otherwise it is its own type."
Sure it does. On phone now, but I linked to the 3.5 SRD in another post that shows 3.5 considered it a bonus type.Ability is a type of bonus.No it isn't. All of the bonus types are actually named in the game. I just don't remember which book. I think it is Ultimate Magic when they are discussing the creation of spells, or it might be Ultimate Campaign.The list you refer to is in Ultimate Magic. But that is not a comprehensive list, because it does not include ability bonuses or trait bonuses. Its a list for designing spells.
Secondly, its in ultimate magic. The game is intended that I can play it with the core rulebook only. So where in that book is there a list! There isn't.
Thirdly, v3.5 lists ability bonuses as a type.
The reason there is no value prefixing <ability> bonus, is because the bonus is variable based on who's ability you are referring to.
3.5 does not have ability as a bonus type, and your other post I am saying that Pathfinder has named every type of bonus that has a name. You can't just go applying your own names to them. There is a list on D20pfsrd which I see someone has linked to.
I do have the 3.5 player's handbook. The glossary in the back is in alphabetical order. It goes from "ability", to "ability check". "Ability Bonus" is not listed.
edit: I see Kazaan has already handled this.
I see "ability modifier" from http://www.d20srd.org/. I do not see "ability bonus".
However I have the official SRD from WoTC which you can download here--> http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/article/srd35
It does not have an ability bonus that I see. If it is there let me know where it is.
What we have here is the same source of confusion that results from Race Traits and Racial traits sharing a common term (trait) with different mechanical meanings.
... your argument needs a bonus not to be a bonus. There is NO basis for declaring this.
Sure it does. On phone now, but I linked to the 3.5 SRD in another post that shows 3.5 considered it a bonus type.Ability is a type of bonus.No it isn't. All of the bonus types are actually named in the game. I just don't remember which book. I think it is Ultimate Magic when they are discussing the creation of spells, or it might be Ultimate Campaign.The list you refer to is in Ultimate Magic. But that is not a comprehensive list, because it does not include ability bonuses or trait bonuses. Its a list for designing spells.
Secondly, its in ultimate magic. The game is intended that I can play it with the core rulebook only. So where in that book is there a list! There isn't.
Thirdly, v3.5 lists ability bonuses as a type.
The reason there is no value prefixing <ability> bonus, is because the bonus is variable based on who's ability you are referring to.
3.5 does not have ability as a bonus type, and your other post I am saying that Pathfinder has named every type of bonus that has a name. You can't just go applying your own names to them. There is a list on D20pfsrd which I see someone has linked to.
I do have the 3.5 player's handbook. The glossary in the back is in alphabetical order. It goes from "ability", to "ability check". "Ability Bonus" is not listed.
edit: I see Kazaan has already handled this.
I haven't been able to find ability bonus in the actual SRD. It's in a few 3rd party online SRD where they added their interpretation to the SRD. Please use a quote from the actual 3.5 book or the WOTC SRD because I've found no list of modifier types as listed in those online 'srd'.
EDIT: I HAVE found one instance of Ability bonus but it's used differently that the ability modifier. Under magic creation I found Ability bonus (enhancement) as in Gloves of Dexterity +2. So an ability bonus seems to be a modifier to the actual stat and NOT to the stats modifier from the ability chart.
Edit 2: Pathfinder seems to have the same text so ability bonuses are modifiers to the stat there too.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This argument is spectacular. Neither side has a single source supporting their point, and it's devolved into the internet version of a shouting match - or as I like to call it, "The 'Emphasis Mine' Argument".
The only thing that will end this is a Paizo ruling. One is desperately needed - probably more than on any other ruling. This is an area where the rules are utterly silent, and is hotly contested with loud followings for both sides.
I haven't been able to find ability bonus in the actual SRD. It's in a few 3rd party online SRD where they added their interpretation to the SRD. Please use a quote from the actual 3.5 book or the WOTC SRD because I've found no list of modifier types as listed in those online 'srd'.
EDIT: I HAVE found one instance of Ability bonus but it's used differently that the ability modifier. Under magic creation I found Ability bonus (enhancement) as in Gloves of Dexterity +2. So an ability bonus seems to be a modifier to...
Yeah, this seems to be similar:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magicItems/wondrousItems.html#belt-of-in credible-dexterity
This belt has a large silver buckle, usually depicting the image of a tiger. The belt grants the wearer an enhancement bonus to Dexterity of +2, +4, or +6. Treat this as a temporary ability bonus for the first 24 hours the belt is worn.
I do not think the wording, "Treat this as a temporary ability bonus for the first 24 hours the belt is worn." means that 'ability' is its own bonus type.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sure it does. On phone now, but I linked to the 3.5 SRD in another post that shows 3.5 considered it a bonus type.
This is not a valid list as it comes from a third party site.
I haven't been able to find ability bonus in the actual SRD. It's in a few 3rd party online SRD where they added their interpretation to the SRD. Please use a quote from the actual 3.5 book or the WOTC SRD because I've found no list of modifier types as listed in those online 'srd'.
EDIT: I HAVE found one instance of Ability bonus but it's used differently that the ability modifier. Under magic creation I found Ability bonus (enhancement) as in Gloves of Dexterity +2. So an ability bonus seems to be a modifier to...
Yeah, this seems to be similar:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magicItems/wondrousItems.html#belt-of-in credible-dexterity
This belt has a large silver buckle, usually depicting the image of a tiger. The belt grants the wearer an enhancement bonus to Dexterity of +2, +4, or +6. Treat this as a temporary ability bonus for the first 24 hours the belt is worn.I do not think the wording, "Treat this as a temporary ability bonus for the first 24 hours the belt is worn." means that 'ability' is its own bonus type.
Look in the actual magic creation section. Find Table: Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values. You'll see Ability bonus listed as a bonus on the stat.
Now I don't think it's own type but it's the closest we have in print to it being one. It's more valid IMO than BigNorseWolf's idea that the stat's modifier is the type.
The types of bonuses are clearly defined within the game. In addition to the list linked to, there are also Racial and Trait bonuses.
To my knowledge, there are no other bonuses, and "Ability bonus" is not one of them.
The types of bonuses are clearly defined within the game. In addition to the list linked to, there are also Racial and Trait bonuses.
To my knowledge, there are no other bonuses, and "Ability bonus" is not one of them.
Yep, that's my list too. The ones the game actually comes out and SAYS they are a type of bonus.
I haven't been able to find ability bonus in the actual SRD. It's in a few 3rd party online SRD where they added their interpretation to the SRD. Please use a quote from the actual 3.5 book or the WOTC SRD because I've found no list of modifier types as listed in those online 'srd'.
EDIT: I HAVE found one instance of Ability bonus but it's used differently that the ability modifier. Under magic creation I found Ability bonus (enhancement) as in Gloves of Dexterity +2. So an ability bonus seems to be a modifier to...
Yeah, this seems to be similar:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magicItems/wondrousItems.html#belt-of-in credible-dexterity
This belt has a large silver buckle, usually depicting the image of a tiger. The belt grants the wearer an enhancement bonus to Dexterity of +2, +4, or +6. Treat this as a temporary ability bonus for the first 24 hours the belt is worn.I do not think the wording, "Treat this as a temporary ability bonus for the first 24 hours the belt is worn." means that 'ability' is its own bonus type.Look in the actual magic creation section. Find Table: Estimating Magic Item Gold Piece Values. You'll see Ability bonus listed as a bonus on the stat.
Now I don't think it's own type but it's the closest we have in print to it being one. It's more valid IMO than BigNorseWolf's idea that the stat's modifier is the type.
Ahh, ok I see it here:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magicItems/magicItemCreation.html#table- 15-29-estimating-magic-item-gold-piece-values
I would agree with you. In this table it references that same Belt of incredible dexterity +2 as the example for Ability bonus (enhancement), which seems to indicate it is merely talking about the fact this item provides an enhancement bonus to an ability score.
|
|
Sure it does. On phone now, but I linked to the 3.5 SRD in another post that shows 3.5 considered it a bonus type.This is not a valid list as it comes from a third party site.
Hmm... you seem to be correct there.
However, I took a look directly at the WotC SRD documents, and they don't actually have anything about the basic rules of bonus stacking listed. So where would the 3rd party site have gotten that information to call it part of the SRD?
Seems a lot of the basic rules are missing from the WotC SRD document.
|
|
The types of bonuses are clearly defined within the game. In addition to the list linked to, there are also Racial and Trait bonuses.
To my knowledge, there are no other bonuses, and "Ability bonus" is not one of them.
You just contradicted yourself in your own post. You seem to be saying that list is comprehensive, then say it isn't.
The list cannot be used as a comprehensive list, because 1) It is from ultimate Magic, and 2) it is not comprehensive.
It is a list of bonus types that can be used in spells (and specifically lists one bonus type that shouldn't be used in spells.)
That's it. It is not the RAW list of bonus types.
Sure it does. On phone now, but I linked to the 3.5 SRD in another post that shows 3.5 considered it a bonus type.This is not a valid list as it comes from a third party site.Hmm... you seem to be correct there.
However, I took a look directly at the WotC SRD documents, and they don't actually have anything about the basic rules of bonus stacking listed. So where would the 3rd party site have gotten that information to call it part of the SRD?
Seems a lot of the basic rules are missing from the WotC SRD document.
An official WotC document is still third party with respect to PFRPG.
Sure it does. On phone now, but I linked to the 3.5 SRD in another post that shows 3.5 considered it a bonus type.This is not a valid list as it comes from a third party site.Hmm... you seem to be correct there.
However, I took a look directly at the WotC SRD documents, and they don't actually have anything about the basic rules of bonus stacking listed. So where would the 3rd party site have gotten that information to call it part of the SRD?
Seems a lot of the basic rules are missing from the WotC SRD document.
I don't think anything is missing from the SRD but that people have been taking what's in those 3rd party site are fact.
Most likely they assumed it was like you did and just made a 'condensed' list with it on. As far as I know there IS no list past the one in the pathfinder magic section. I'm 99.99% sure you aren't going to find one in the core books for 3.5.
W to the alter: Just pointing out that the exact same term is used for a bonus to the stat AND the modifier from those stats. If ability was a type, which one would the type be? ;)
That's it. It is not the RAW list of bonus types.
That is totally 100% incorrect. It might not be a complete list but it's a RAW list. it's written in the rules books hence it's RAW. Feel free to argue if it applies but it's 100% RAW.
|
|
Yep, that's my list too. The ones the game actually comes out and SAYS they are a type of bonus.The types of bonuses are clearly defined within the game. In addition to the list linked to, there are also Racial and Trait bonuses.
To my knowledge, there are no other bonuses, and "Ability bonus" is not one of them.
Here is an interesting nugget:
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.
There is no language calling out Racial as a bonus type specifically (like for Trait bonus in the Advanced Players Guide).
It is not on the chart from Ultimate Magic for designing spells.
Only the paragraph above lets us know it is a bonus type.
The Combat chapter of the Core Rulebook lists several bonus types that will add to CMD if they have already been added to AC. Those we can definitively determine are bonus types, because the are listed there. But they don't include half of the bonus types from the chart in Ultimate Magic.
Specifically, the rules require you to determine what is typed and not typed based on whether the bonus is named, or not.
If it appears, "You receive a +1 bonus to your AC." That is untyped. As there is no word directly preceding the word bonus.
if it appears, "You receive a +4 <word> bonus to your AC." That is typed. As there is a word directly preceding the word bonus.
If it appears, "you receive your <ability> bonus to your AC." That is also typed. The number is missing, because it is variable based on each individual who might gain such a bonus.
RAW, there really isn't any other way to interpret that.
If you want to read into the rules as to what the designers intended, that's fine. But lets not kid ourselves that RAW specifically defines ability bonuses as untyped. It doesn't.
Occam's Razor folks. The simplest answer is the right now. In this case, the simplest answer is that ability bonuses are typed. Because otherwise we have defined an entirely different meaning for the word bonus. We don't need six definitions of bonus like we do level.
|
|
An official WotC document is still third party with respect to PFRPG.Sure it does. On phone now, but I linked to the 3.5 SRD in another post that shows 3.5 considered it a bonus type.This is not a valid list as it comes from a third party site.Hmm... you seem to be correct there.
However, I took a look directly at the WotC SRD documents, and they don't actually have anything about the basic rules of bonus stacking listed. So where would the 3rd party site have gotten that information to call it part of the SRD?
Seems a lot of the basic rules are missing from the WotC SRD document.
Now you're just trolling me here. I never said that the 3.5 SRD document should be used as RAW.
I said that since Pathfinder was built on the 3.5 chassis, that with lack of information or language in the Pathfinder ruleset, we can always use the 3.5 rules to help inform us as to how Pathfinder works.
That's all I have said.
|
|
Sure it does. On phone now, but I linked to the 3.5 SRD in another post that shows 3.5 considered it a bonus type.This is not a valid list as it comes from a third party site.Hmm... you seem to be correct there.
However, I took a look directly at the WotC SRD documents, and they don't actually have anything about the basic rules of bonus stacking listed. So where would the 3rd party site have gotten that information to call it part of the SRD?
Seems a lot of the basic rules are missing from the WotC SRD document.
I don't think anything is missing from the SRD but that people have been taking what's in those 3rd party site are fact.
Most likely they assumed it was like you did and just made a 'condensed' list with it on. As far as I know there IS no list past the one in the pathfinder magic section. I'm 99.99% sure you aren't going to find one in the core books for 3.5.
W to the alter: Just pointing out that the exact same term is used for a bonus to the stat AND the modifier from those stats. If ability was a type, which one would the type be? ;)
That's it. It is not the RAW list of bonus types.That is totally 100% incorrect. It might not be a complete list but it's a RAW list. it's written in the rules books hence it's RAW. Feel free to argue if it applies but it's 100% RAW.
Add comprehensive before RAW in my sentence. It will more clearly explain what I'm trying to say.
What I mean to say is, that lots of rules are missing from the WotC SRD document. Like most of the combat rules are missing too.
|
|
If they responded to that they might have to think about how hp's work by adding your con bonus multiple times...I'm still waiting for a good response to mysterious stranger/pistilaro fiasco that forced errata from the devs since it most definitively worked.I think you may have to wait a long time. I wouldn't hold your breath or put off anything important.I just realized you're right.
They literally break the game fundamentally if stats are typed bonuses.
Specific trumps general.
The general rule is that like bonuses don't stack (unless some other source says they do).
In this case, the specific rule of how multiclassing works or hit points or two-handed weapons trumps that general rule.
There is no fundamental breakage of the rules.
You just have to read the rules comprehensively instead of one sentence at a time.
If they responded to that they might have to think about how hp's work by adding your con bonus multiple times...I'm still waiting for a good response to mysterious stranger/pistilaro fiasco that forced errata from the devs since it most definitively worked.I think you may have to wait a long time. I wouldn't hold your breath or put off anything important.I just realized you're right.
They literally break the game fundamentally if stats are typed bonuses.
Specific trumps general.
The general rule is that like bonuses don't stack (unless some other source says they do).
In this case, the specific rule of how multiclassing works or hit points or two-handed weapons trumps that general rule.
There is no fundamental breakage of the rules.
You just have to read the rules comprehensively instead of one sentence at a time.
Nope, the section on multiclassing say you add together your features. They never say they stack so you don't and you'd have to take the highest. Same with hp. you add with NOTHING about stacking. There IS no specific to trump general... or you accept that not everything that's a bonus is a type.
What I mean to say is, that lots of rules are missing from the WotC SRD document. Like most of the combat rules are missing too.
Really? I just downloaded it and I got 27 pages of combat. I don't see any missing parts.
Only the paragraph above lets us know it is a bonus type.
Is there a rule that you have to have something called out in multiple places for it to count? RAW, one is fine. It just so happens that ability bonuses don't have even that one instance.
Occam's Razor folks. The simplest answer is the right now. In this case, the simplest answer is that ability bonuses are typed.
No, the simplest thing is to follow the book/rules on what it calls out as a type. It's that was because we have bonus means multiple things (simply a positive modifier vs a type of modifier for stacking). The only way to know which is which is to let the rules tell you.