What is the meaning of 'source' in regards to bonus stacking?


Rules Questions

251 to 300 of 1,084 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>

Kazaan wrote:
Apparently, you failed to read the rest of the post.

It was read. Given the consideration it was due. And then dismissed on its own lack of merit.. There is nothing complex or clever about what you're trying to do here.


Kazaan wrote:
I made a point, that Bonus and Bonus don't necessarily mean the same thing in this case, analogous to Trait and Trait and Medium and Medium. It is a valid and logical point.

I've already tried this and they seemingly take no notice of/ignored it. Ability bonus is listed as both the modifier from the stat chart AND the modifier to the actual stat but they claim it's TOTALLY obvious and logical that one is clearly a type and the other exactly worded term isn't. I don't know what else to say...


Right. That thing we call a bonus that adds to a die roll is completely different from that thing we call a bonus that adds to a die roll....

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Magic Dealer wrote:
You need more than that to prove it.

No. We don't.

Arbitrarily picking one side of the debate and insisting that that side requires absolute proof but the other side is just fine with some suggestion from how a spell might work is disingenuous bunk.

Quote:
And, in the case of ability scores, nothing so far in these discussions has made wisdom bonus look more like a bonus type than a governs bonus.

Ok, I have officially lost any pretext that the stacking side even has a genuine point now. It is nothing less than epistemic nihilism to say that that you need to PROVE that a wisdom bonus is a bonus.

When you take the position to declare something new in contradiction to a long-accepted assumption, the proof of burden IS on you. Sorry.

It is absolutely reasonable to ask you to prove that a wisdom bonus is actually referring to a specific subset of rules about bonus types for the purposes of stacking, rather than just using the terms bonus, penalty, and modifier interchangeably. I've already shown several places where bonus follows another word where it's pretty obviously not meant to declare a bonus type.

It's not an overly skeptical to ask you to provide evidence that a wisdom bonus refers to typed bonuses for stacking purposes when there's obvious evidence that not everything that follows (something) (bonus) format is a bonus type.

But if you don't feel like doing it, then don't. *shrug*

We ALL know that the devs will read through the thread, their eyes slowly glazing over at the repeated arguments, before having a discussion about how each side would affect the longer view of the game system.

In reality, declaring ability scores to be bonus types will require a lot of additional rulings for the game system to hold together. The one I've seen thrown about is con bonuses and hitpoints, but I'd expect issues to start popping up like weeds.

So I don't expect to see ability scores being recognized as bonus types any time soon.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Right. That thing we call a bonus that adds to a die roll is completely different from that thing we call a bonus that adds to a die roll....

You've said you've read and understood the argument about the complex equivocation, but I haven't actually seen a rebuttal to it.

I note: If we do accept that "wisdom" is a bonus type, then it turns out that the famous developer quote about the two bonuses coming from the same source is in fact wrong. Because sources and types are not the same thing at all.

But I don't think that the "Wisdom" in "Wisdom bonus" is the same kind of modifier as the "enhancement" in "enhancement bonus". For much the same reason that "college student" and "math student" are making fundamentally different kinds of claims about the student; one is telling you where they are a student, but not what they study, and the other tells you what they study, but not where they study it.

There's other cues to tell you these things are different. It's your Wisdom bonus, but an enhancement bonus. You can have multiple enhancement bonuses, which don't stack. But there is only one "your Wisdom bonus"; it's a feature of your character.

In the case of "Wisdom bonus", we're not being given additional information about the type of a bonus, but rather, we're being given a restrictive qualifier on the more general concept of "Wisdom modifier". You could in theory even have something which applies only "your Wisdom penalty". Because when you're talking about modifiers, "bonus" and "penalty" are used to denote "this value, but only if positive, otherwise zero" or "this value, but only if negative, otherwise zero".

But you'll note: There's no such thing as stacking rules for "modifiers" or "penalties". They don't have types at all.

So if "Wisdom bonus" is a typed bonus (type "wisdom"), what exactly are "Wisdom modifier" and "Wisdom penalty"? They can't be typed modifiers and penalties, because modifiers and penalties don't have types. There's no such thing as an "enhancement penalty" or a "racial penalty".

To quote the PRD:

"Penalty: Penalties are numerical values that are subtracted from a check or statistical score. Penalties do not have a type and most penalties stack with one another."

Penalties do not have a type.

So whatever "Wisdom" is in "Wisdom penalty" or "Wisdom modifier" or "Wisdom bonus", it cannot be a type. It's something else.

Conveniently, we already know what; it's an adjunct noun. It's telling you, not what kind of bonus or penalty we are discussing, but which bonus or penalty we are discussing.


BigNorseWolf wrote:

Right. That thing we call a bonus that adds to a die roll is completely different from that thing we call a bonus that adds to a die roll....

Nope, you failed reading 101.

Ability bonus #1 does add to the roll.
Ability bonus #2 adds to the stat itself. No roll.
Which one is the type? And why isn't the other? Or is maybe neither one automatically a type (my vote).

Liberty's Edge

graystone wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

Right. That thing we call a bonus that adds to a die roll is completely different from that thing we call a bonus that adds to a die roll....

Nope, you failed reading 101.

Ability bonus #1 does add to the roll.
Ability bonus #2 adds to the stat itself. No roll.
Which one is the type? And why isn't the other? Or is maybe neither one automatically a type (my vote).

Just wanted to chime in here one last time on this point.

The chart in the magic item creation section of the book has many instances of language that doesn't follow convention throughout the rest of the book.

The list Save Bonus (resistance)
Armor Bonus (enhancement)
Natural Armor Bonus (enhancement)

Etc.

So saying that Ability Bonus (enhancement) is a +2 Ability Bonus to your Ability is patently false.

Its a horribly unclear way to write the chart. But a little further investigation in actually looking at the items that have those types of bonuses, it specifically says you get an Enhancement bonus or Resistance Bonus to your X.

So the bonus type is what is in parenthesis on the chart.

Trying to use the horrible language construct in that chart that follows no other language convention from the book to justify your argument is silly.


Andrew Christian wrote:


So saying that Ability Bonus (enhancement) is a +2 Ability Bonus to your Ability is patently false.

Andrew, you seem to not understand what "I'm out" means...

On the argument, look at these.
Shield enhancement bonuses
armor enhancement bonuses
Are these not shield/armor bonuses? It's why they stack.

Just because it has one type doesn't mean to doesn't have another. So NOT patently false. I'm not the one saying that a bonus with a word in front of it is a type, you guys are...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:


So saying that Ability Bonus (enhancement) is a +2 Ability Bonus to your Ability is patently false.

Andrew, you seem to not understand what "I'm out" means...

On the argument, look at these.
Shield enhancement bonuses
armor enhancement bonuses
Are these not shield/armor bonuses?

No, they aren't.

They're enhancement bonuses coming from shields, and enhancement bonuses coming from armor.

You can have one armor bonus, and one shield bonus, and then you can have an enhancement bonus from each, which is a special rule.

Quote:
It's why they stack.

No, it isn't.

"Shields: Shield enhancement bonuses stack with armor enhancement bonuses."

That's why they stack; because there is a specific rule that the enhancement bonus to AC from a shield stacks with the enhancement bonus to AC from armor.

Quote:
Just because it has one type doesn't mean to doesn't have another.

Actually, it does. A bonus is untyped or has exactly one type.

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Find some insight from SKR, on why ability modifiers are referred to as "bonuses" here.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I sometimes find that we could use the help a linguistics Phd in pathfinder`s forums


2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Kazaan wrote:
Apparently, you failed to read the rest of the post.

It was read. Given the consideration it was due. And then dismissed on its own lack of merit.. There is nothing complex or clever about what you're trying to do here.

Which is precisely why I said that you failed to read the rest of the post. It doesn't matter whether you didn't read it at all or read it and were incapable of processing the contents; you failed at reaching the correct conclusion. You are very right, though; I don't really consider this matter of bonuses to be complex nor the analysis particularly demanding of cleverness. It's just so surprising that such a simple subject matter can be so horrendously misunderstood by what I'd call a statistically significant number of people; especially people who are, otherwise, obviously capable of doing other equally mundane things like operate a computer to type on a forum. That's the real mind boggler.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
seebs wrote:
graystone wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:


So saying that Ability Bonus (enhancement) is a +2 Ability Bonus to your Ability is patently false.

Andrew, you seem to not understand what "I'm out" means...

On the argument, look at these.
Shield enhancement bonuses
armor enhancement bonuses
Are these not shield/armor bonuses?

No, they aren't.

They're enhancement bonuses coming from shields, and enhancement bonuses coming from armor.

You can have one armor bonus, and one shield bonus, and then you can have an enhancement bonus from each, which is a special rule.

Quote:
It's why they stack.

No, it isn't.

"Shields: Shield enhancement bonuses stack with armor enhancement bonuses."

That's why they stack; because there is a specific rule that the enhancement bonus to AC from a shield stacks with the enhancement bonus to AC from armor.

Quote:
Just because it has one type doesn't mean to doesn't have another.
Actually, it does. A bonus is untyped or has exactly one type.

The same logic that gets you to ability bonus is a type gets you to:

Shield enhancement bonus is both a shield bonus and an enhancement bonus.
Armor enhancement bonuses is both a armor bonus and an enhancement bonus.
Ability Bonus (enhancement) is both an ability bonus and an enhancement bonus.
And all of them must types by that logic.

For stacking I was pointing out that you have to keep the shield/armor part of the enhancement bonus for it to stack. A plain enhancement bonus
can't stack with others. Only shield enhancement bonus and armor enhancement bonuses out of all the enhancement bonuses stack. You can't just say enhancement bonus and have to add the qualifier. That's why is equally valid by the 'word + bonus = word type logic.

So I agree what I wrote is wrong but that's how ability bonus = ability typed bonus logic takes you. ;)

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

There is nothing whatsoever which will advance this shouting match besides a Paizo response. With over two HUNDRED FAQ requests, it is painfully obvious that this is a hotly contested issue, and is disruptive to the game in general. Personally, I have a character I cannot build because at every game, his armor class will either be increased or decreased at the whim of the GM because this issue has no stance in the rules and there is no official answer.

Paizo... give us a reply here. This has gotten utterly ridiculous.


Same case here. My character wont change if they make the bonus not stack, but it would save a lot of headaches if they give an oficial answer.

Actually, they could do the ACG FAQ ASAP since the book has many places needing clarification... specially monk stuff (just see pummeling style).

Primal Bloodragers will be the monsters of combat anyway :P


The Morphling wrote:

There is nothing whatsoever which will advance this shouting match besides a Paizo response. With over two HUNDRED FAQ requests, it is painfully obvious that this is a hotly contested issue, and is disruptive to the game in general. Personally, I have a character I cannot build because at every game, his armor class will either be increased or decreased at the whim of the GM because this issue has no stance in the rules and there is no official answer.

Paizo... give us a reply here. This has gotten utterly ridiculous.

I agree. That's why I'm holding off on mine as well. Hopefully they grace us with an answer to this question and by extension the OP's question.

Paizo Employee Official Rules Response

10 people marked this as a favorite.

FIFY (FAQed it for you).

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.

Thanks for your FAQ requests! As a note of interest, this was the second most FAQed topic in the whole FAQ queue.


HOORAY FOR THE FAQ! It's super nice getting some answers to all the questions we have. Please keep them coming. One a Friday is so much better than nothing.


I seem to recall a post that listed all the potential places where the answer to this would have an effect. It'd be nice to copy it here (or create it if I'm imagining things) so we can see if there are any combinations that this doesn't break. I definitely remember seeing several examples of things that will no longer work as intended with this ruling. Like Dragon Ferocity which will now not add any extra damage at all.

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Chess Pwn wrote:
HOORAY FOR THE FAQ! It's super nice getting some answers to all the questions we have. Please keep them coming. One a Friday is so much better than nothing.

I will try to keep them coming at the rate of one a Friday. I believe I can do that, since the schedule of it gets people used to looking at one per week for just a short time. In the past, as you know, it's been more of a binge where a whole bunch get answered in a short time with presumably a long meeting, then leading to not being able to do anything for a while. It's possible that we (since I was as a fan part of this at the time) may have encouraged this by sending food as a thanks for the binges of new FAQs. Hehe, oops!

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
ZanThrax wrote:
I seem to recall a post that listed all the potential places where the answer to this would have an effect. It'd be nice to copy it here (or create it if I'm imagining things) so we can see if there are any combinations that this doesn't break. I definitely remember seeing several examples of things that will no longer work as intended with this ruling. Like Dragon Ferocity which will now not add any extra damage at all.

Dragon Ferocity will definitely need a new wording (probably something like "increase by half your Strength bonus").


If I'm reading this correctly, this means that abilities that replace one stat modifier with another (Int to AC instead of Dex, or Int for various skills instead of Cha) will now definitely not work with abilities that add a stat modifier to another (Int added to Dex to AC, or Int added to those same skills)?

Can the next FAQ be an answer to if changing the stat that applies to skills and initiative changes what stat they're based on (i.e. is Perception an Int-based or Wis-based check for an Empiricist?)


It probably would be nice to compile a list of what things don't work with this new ruling in effect. Dragon Ferocity is a big one but there should be others.

There is probably a few things that are now inoperable cause of this.

Paizo Employee Designer

ZanThrax wrote:

If I'm reading this correctly, this means that abilities that replace one stat modifier with another (Int to AC instead of Dex, or Int for various skills instead of Cha) will now definitely not work with abilities that add a stat modifier to another (Int added to Dex to AC, or Int added to those same skills)?

Can the next FAQ be an answer to if changing the stat that applies to skills and initiative changes what stat they're based on (i.e. is Perception an Int-based or Wis-based check for an Empiricist?)

That's on my list.

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Pathfinder Design Team wrote:
As a note of interest, this was the second most FAQed topic in the whole FAQ queue.

Hmm... I wonder what #1 could be...

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Nefreet wrote:
Pathfinder Design Team wrote:
As a note of interest, this was the second most FAQed topic in the whole FAQ queue.
Hmm... I wonder what #1 could be...

You can blame those darned gnomes and halflings and their manufactured weapons for that. Seriously, I created something elegant that had thus-far pinned down everything, only to find that those small races were the only thing in the game that couldn't fit. Come, my friends, let us band together and lay waste to the villages of all the gnomes and halflings until we have our FAQ!


Thanks PDT for trying to get to these issues and tackle them!


8 people marked this as a favorite.

I was actually curious about that Nefreet. Thanks.

I've started making a list of all the examples I can find so we can see which, if any of them, do or do not stack under this ruling. (And having read through the last half of this thread again, I remembered why I stopped following it previously.)

Here's the examples I've found so far, although I'm sure that there ought to be more than this:

Critical Perfection (Kensai Magus) and Arcane Accuracy:
Critical Perfection adds Intelligence directly to confirmation rolls.
Arcane Accuracy gives an Insight bonus equal to Intelligence to hit.
Stacks.

Agile Manoeuvres, Fury's Fall, and Weapon Finesse
Agile Manoeuvres adds Dexterity to CMB for all manoeuvre types instead of Strength.
Fury's Fall adds Dexterity to CMB for trip only.
Weapon Finesse adds Dexterity to all attacks instead of Strength, which automatically includes manoeuvres that use the weapon being Finessed.
Doesn't Stack

Monk's AC Bonus and Sacred Fist AC Bonus
Monk's AC Bonus adds Wisdom bonus to AC and CMD, and grants +1 AC for every four Monk levels.
Sacred Fist's AC Bonus adds Wisdom modifier to AC and CMD, and grants +1 deflection to AC for every four Sacred Fist levels
Doesn't Stack Caveat: The +1 AC / four levels still should.

Zen Archer and Evangelist of Erastil
Zen Archery (Ex): At 3rd level, a zen archer may use his Wisdom modifier instead of his Dexterity modifier on ranged attack rolls when using a bow.
Faithful Archer (Ex) You are particularly skilled at using Erastil’s favored weapon. When using a longbow, you add your Wisdom bonus on attack and damage rolls against targets within 30 feet.
Doesn't Stack You'd still gain the Wisdom to damage part though.

Alchemist and Underground Chemist (Rogue)
Throw Anything (Ex): ... An alchemist adds his Intelligence modifier to damage done with splash weapons, including the splash damage if any.
Chemical Weapons (Ex): ... adds her Intelligence modifier to damage dealt with splash weapons, including any splash damage.
Doesn't Stack

Infiltrator (Inquisitor), Heretic (Inquisitor), Conversion Inquisition, and Heresy Inquisition
Guileful Lore (Ex): ... the infiltrator ... adds her Wisdom modifier on Bluff and Diplomacy skill checks in addition to the normal ability score modifiers.
Lore of Escape (Ex): ...the heretic ... adds her Wisdom modifier on Bluff and Stealth skill checks in addition to the normal ability score modifiers.
Charm of Wisdom (Ex): You use your Wisdom modifier instead of your Charisma modifier when making Bluff, Diplomacy, and Intimidate checks.
Righteous Infiltration (Ex): You use your Wisdom modifier instead of your Charisma modifier when making Bluff and Intimidate checks.
Doesn't Stack

Dragon Ferocity
Benefit: While using Dragon Style, you gain a bonus on unarmed strike damage rolls equal to half your Strength bonus. When you score a critical hit or a successful Stunning Fist attempt against an opponent while using this style, that opponent is also shaken for a number of rounds equal to 1d4 + your Strength bonus.
No longer adds any damage

If anyone has more examples, feel free to C&P and add to the list. I'm going to go look through the Getting X to Y guide to see how much of it is affected by this.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Umm, does this not make just about every Inquisitor option redundant?

Really, it will take a serious effort just to not have abilities that now do nothing.

Could this not have just been handled on a case by case basis?

I think this will lead to even more errata/FAQ, handled this way, instead of by each case.

A number of these seem purposefully created to stack.

How are we to handle ablities that change the base stat?

Paizo Employee Designer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Those inquisitor options were never intended to stack. Not choosing one of those two inquisitions out of all the domain and inquisition options available if you are one of those two archetypes does not seem like that serious of an effort required. To my knowledge, only Dragon Ferocity is affected unintentionally.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Crossbowman (Fighter) and Bolt Ace (Gunslinger)
Deadshot (Ex): ...when a crossbowman attacks with a crossbow as a readied action, he may add 1/2 his Dexterity bonus (minimum +1) on his damage roll.
Crossbow Training (Ex): ... a bolt ace ... gains a bonus on damage rolls equal to her Dexterity modifier...
Doesn't Stack

Student of War and Duellist or Kensai (Magus)
Mind Over Metal (Ex): A ... student of war ... can use her Intelligence modifier in place of her Dexterity modifier for determining her Armor Class. The armor’s normal maximum Dexterity bonus still applies...
Canny Defense (Ex): ... a duelist adds 1 point of Intelligence bonus (if any) per duelist class level to her Dexterity bonus to modify Armor Class while wielding a melee weapon. If a duelist is caught flat-footed or otherwise denied her Dexterity bonus, she also loses this bonus.
Canny Defense (Ex): when a kensai is wielding his chosen weapon, he gains the canny defense ability. This is identical to the duelist prestige class ability of the same name (Core Rulebook 382), save that his chosen weapon may be of any type.
Probably doesn't stack
Prescient Defense (Su): The magus can expend 1 point from his arcane pool as an immediate action after hitting a target with a weapon attack, granting him a premonition of his enemy’s intentions. The magus gains a bonus to his AC and on Reflex saves equal to his Intelligence modifier (minimum 0) against attacks by that opponent until the beginning of his next turn.
Doesn't stack
Spell Shield (Su): The magus can expend a point from his arcane pool as an immediate action to grant himself a shield bonus to AC equal to his Intelligence bonus until the end of his next turn.
Stacks

Intelligence instead of X and Intelligence added to X for various skills
Kitsune’s Guile (Ex): ... She adds her Intelligence modifier on Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, and Sense Motive checks
Canny Sleuth (Ex): A Sleepless detective adds her Intelligence bonus (if any) on all Perception and Sense Motive checks, as well as on Diplomacy checks made to gather information, in addition to adding her Wisdom or Charisma modifier as normal.
Eye for Detail (Ex): A shieldmarshal adds his Intelligence bonus as well as his Wisdom bonus on Perception and Sense Motive checks...
Arcane Cloak (Su): The magus can expend 1 point from his arcane pool to add his Intelligence bonus to Stealth checks and Bluff checks to create a diversion in order to hide. This bonus lasts for 1 minute.

Ceaseless Observation (Ex): ... an empiricist uses his Intelligence modifier instead of the skill’s typical ability for all Disable Device, Perception, Sense Motive, and Use Magic Device checks. He can also use his Intelligence modifier instead of Charisma on any Diplomacy checks made to gather information.
Bruising Intellect
... you may use your Intelligence modifier when making Intimidate checks instead of your Charisma modifier.
Student of Philosophy
... use your Intelligence modifier in place of your Charisma modifier on Diplomacy checks to persuade others and on Bluff checks to convince others that a lie is true. (This trait does not affect Diplomacy checks to gather information or Bluff checks to feint in combat.)
Pragmatic Activator
...use your Intelligence modifier when making Use Magic Device checks instead of your Charisma modifier.
Clever Wordplay
...Choose one Charisma-based skill. You attempt checks with that skill using your Intelligence modifier instead of your Charisma modifier.
Don't stack Abilities that add a second stat to a skill check were already better than ones that replace the regular stat; this just pushes things even farther in that direction.

I got bored with the x to y list after Intelligence. There's almost certainly some stuff in the Wisdom and Charisma sections that won't stack now.

Maybe Mark's right and Dragon Ferocity's the only feat that's affected by this ruling; I certainly don't know of very many feats that key off of ability modifiers.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Don't stack Abilities that add a second stat to a skill check were already better than ones that replace the regular stat; this just pushes things even farther in that direction.

Actually, wouldn't only taking the ones that add two ability scores while also taking a replacement trigger the FAQ? If you're replacing the regular stat, then you're just replacing it.

Also, confirmed that everything you've listed in that post that doesn't stack is intended not to stack.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Let me give an example of how this creates dead abilities:

An Inquisitor, at second level, gains Cunning Initiative:

Advanced Players Guide wrote:


Cunning Initiative (Ex): At 2nd level, an inquisitor adds her Wisdom modifier on initiative checks, in addition to her Dexterity modifier.

Now, we have the Tactics Inquisition, which, by being an Inquisition, is clearly intended for the Inquisitor:

Ultimate Magic wrote:


Grant the Initiative (Ex): At 8th level, you and all allies within 30 feet may add your Wisdom bonus to your initiative checks.

If you notice the italicized portion, it now is completely irrelevant, even though it would seem not intended to be.

Also, we know not what to do, when an ability modifier, is added to something based off that ability score. Such as something that would say, add your charisma modifier, to a charisma based skill.

Is everyone of these cases, and ones like it, going to be errata'd, or now become useless?

Sczarni

Mark Seifter wrote:
Quote:
Don't stack Abilities that add a second stat to a skill check were already better than ones that replace the regular stat; this just pushes things even farther in that direction.

Actually, wouldn't only taking the ones that add two ability scores while also taking a replacement trigger the FAQ? If you're replacing the regular stat, then you're just replacing it.

Also, confirmed that everything you've listed in that post that doesn't stack is intended not to stack.

Just to confirm I am understanding this correctly, Monk AC Bonus from Monk and Sacred Fist do not stack, correct?

Dark Archive

Kazumetsa Raijin wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Quote:
Don't stack Abilities that add a second stat to a skill check were already better than ones that replace the regular stat; this just pushes things even farther in that direction.

Actually, wouldn't only taking the ones that add two ability scores while also taking a replacement trigger the FAQ? If you're replacing the regular stat, then you're just replacing it.

Also, confirmed that everything you've listed in that post that doesn't stack is intended not to stack.

Just to confirm I am understanding this correctly, Monk AC Bonus from Monk and Sacred Fist do not stack, correct?

Yep.

Time to bust out the Brawling Mithral Kikko for all Sacred Fists.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Let me give an example of how this creates dead abilities:

An Inquisitor, at second level, gains Cunning Initiative:

Advanced Players Guide wrote:


Cunning Initiative (Ex): At 2nd level, an inquisitor adds her Wisdom modifier on initiative checks, in addition to her Dexterity modifier.

Now, we have the Tactics Inquisition, which, by being an Inquisition, is clearly intended for the Inquisitor:

Ultimate Magic wrote:


Grant the Initiative (Ex): At 8th level, you and all allies within 30 feet may add your Wisdom bonus to your initiative checks.

If you notice the italicized portion, it now is completely irrelevant, even though it would seem not intended to be.

Also, we know not what to do, when an ability modifier, is added to something based off that ability score. Such as something that would say, add your charisma modifier, to a charisma based skill.

Is everyone of these cases, and ones like it, going to be errata'd, or now become useless?

The you in tactics inquisition seems intended to give the benefit to others who take the inquisition (and given that those other classes lose out on spells, it's good to throw them a bone).

Adding your Charisma modifier to something based off that ability score is adding your Charisma modifier twice on the same roll (or to the same thing). Same source, so it doesn't stack.

Sczarni

Seranov wrote:
Kazumetsa Raijin wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Quote:
Don't stack Abilities that add a second stat to a skill check were already better than ones that replace the regular stat; this just pushes things even farther in that direction.

Actually, wouldn't only taking the ones that add two ability scores while also taking a replacement trigger the FAQ? If you're replacing the regular stat, then you're just replacing it.

Also, confirmed that everything you've listed in that post that doesn't stack is intended not to stack.

Just to confirm I am understanding this correctly, Monk AC Bonus from Monk and Sacred Fist do not stack, correct?

Yep.

Time to bust out the Brawling Mithral Kikko for all Sacred Fists.

Hmm. Sounds like it!


I'm just gonna call it now: this answer is as colossal a mistake. As much so as the disparity between half-breeds and racial heritage as well as the monk flurry w/ single weapon, both of which eventually had to be reversed.


Seranov wrote:
Kazumetsa Raijin wrote:


Just to confirm I am understanding this correctly, Monk AC Bonus from Monk and Sacred Fist do not stack, correct?

Yep.

Time to bust out the Brawling Mithral Kikko for all Sacred Fists.

I was already pretty much on board with armouring my Sacred Fist builds anyhow. They've got the same exact oversight that lets Sohei flurry in armour, and have no Fast Movement to lose, so all putting on armour does is take away the AC bonus that would almost certainly be lower than you get from the armour anyhow.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

So, if an ability changes what the skill is based off of, and another ability adds the modifier, from the same ability score, does the change, or the added modifier, cease to function?

Paizo Employee Designer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:
So, if an ability changes what the skill is based off of, and another ability adds the modifier, from the same ability score, does the change, or the added modifier, cease to function?

Neither. They both function, and they do not stack.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Mark Seifter wrote:

The you in tactics inquisition seems intended to give the benefit to others who take the inquisition (and given that those other classes lose out on spells, it's good to throw them a bone).

So, it's an Inquisition, not intended for Inquisitors?

That's just, really odd.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:

The you in tactics inquisition seems intended to give the benefit to others who take the inquisition (and given that those other classes lose out on spells, it's good to throw them a bone).

So, it's an Inquisition, not intended for Inquisitors?

That's just, really odd.

It's intended for inquisitors. Helping out allies like that is really great. It's just not intended to give inquisitors Wis twice. The author was very forward-thinking and included the self to cover for non-inquisitors or inquisitors who traded out Canny Initiative via archetype.


Very forward thinking indeed; as far as I know there aren't any such archetypes as yet.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Glad to see the FAQ tackling at least one of the more contentious issues kicking around. I can't speak to the subtle rules implications because I can't keep track of all the fiddly little areas that might be affected - there's so many rules in print now I barely try to keep up - but I am happy to see life in the FAQ.

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ZanThrax wrote:
Very forward thinking indeed; as far as I know there aren't any such archetypes as yet.

I know, right? Whichever freelancer wrote that or designer developed that was really on top of their game. I love it when abilities are written so well to work easily with new abilities!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

So, things that say "a bonus equal to <relevant modifier>", stack with things that say "add your <relevant modifier>", as one is from an ability score, whilst the other is from the ability, that just happens to be based of the same ability score?

Paizo Employee Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:
So, things that say "a bonus equal to <relevant modifier>", stack with things that say "add your <relevant modifier>", as one is from an ability score, whilst the other is from the ability, that just happens to be based of the same ability score?

It's a very good question, so the FAQ explicitly answers this.

If it says "a deflection bonus equal to <relevant modifier>" or something like that, then you're fine because they are different sources.

That exact construction you listed, however, with an untyped modifier is specifically called out by the FAQ to be equivalent to "add your <relevant modifier>" and thus same source, doesn't stack.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ZanThrax wrote:
Very forward thinking indeed; as far as I know there aren't any such archetypes as yet.

As an aside, while your memory seems to be correct in this instance, there are also handy tables these days for these sorts of queries.

Grand Lodge

blackbloodtroll wrote:
So, if an ability changes what the skill is based off of, and another ability adds the modifier, from the same ability score, does the change, or the added modifier, cease to function?

Both abilities continue to function. Only their effects don't stack. The skill is now based off the new ability score and the character receives the highest available bonus, if they are different (for instance, if one is multiplied by some factor).

251 to 300 of 1,084 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / What is the meaning of 'source' in regards to bonus stacking? All Messageboards