|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Question: What is the point of having "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." clause in the game?
Per the errata found here and the FAQ found here, Evil Eye and Bestow Curse both stack with themselves which directly contradicts the rule found above or here.
I think this is setting a precedent for tons of other spells (off the top of my head like Blindness/Deafness, Confusion, Elemental Aura, Fire Shield, Protection from Energy, Resist Energy, etc) to follow.
I would think most players would be terrified of multiple castings of Confusion stacking; the affected players rolling multiple times and babbling incoherently when the results do not match each other. Two castings would drop a 25% chance to act normally to to 5%, three castings 1.25% chance. Why wouldn't villians stack Confusion while forcing saves on the heroes that made the first one?
Isn't this rules text the reason some spells were combined while others were broken up (like the Detect Evil or Protection from Chaos spells)?
What's the point or of having having the above rules text in the game if the precedent allows the rule to be pretty much ignored?
Really, what spells does the above rules text affect if not spells like these?
Evil Eyes "stacks" in the sense that you can cast it multiple times on the same character, but read it more carefully and you will see that it only "stacks" when used to apply different effects.
Can I use the evil eye hex more than once on a target?
Yes. As long as you apply a different penalty with each use of the hex (AC, ability checks, attack rolls, saving throws, or skill checks), you can have multiple penalties on the same target. Applying the same hex penalty to a target just resets the duration to the most recent use of the hex.
Example: On round 1, you hex the target's AC. On round 2, you hex the target's attack rolls, so the target now has two evil eye hexes on it. On round 3, you hex the target's saving throws, so it now has three evil eye hexes on it. On round 4, you hex its AC again, resetting the duration of the AC-hex (which does not add an additional –2 penalty to its AC). The same thing would happen if two witches were using evil eye on the same target--as long as each evil eye hex applied a penalty to a different thing, they'd all apply.
This doesn't violate the general rule for stacking penalties--each evil eye effect is basically a different source, even though they stem from the evil eye hex (the evil eye hex is much like 5 separate weak hexes under a common umbrella). In the same way that multiple castings of bestow curse on the same target should stack as long as they do different things (penalize Strength, penalize Dex, penalize attack rolls, take no action, and so on), multiple uses of the evil eye hex stack as long as they're targeting different game statistics.
So spells which apply the same effect will not stack. So Confusion will not stack because it applies a specific single effect and there is not a choice to cause different affects. Blindness/Deafness will "stack" if you cast it twice and choose the other condition on the second casting. Elemental Aura could "stack" as long as you choose a different element with each casting. I could go on, but the point here is the same each time. If the spell can apply a different effect, then choosing that effect does not run into "stacking" rules. If you attempt to apply the same affect it does, and nothing happens (except possibly renewing the effect with a longer duration)
There is no precedent here as you suggest. You have simply misunderstood the clarification.
|
|
I see the original rule applying to cases like Holy Word, which causes multiple effects with random duration. Lets say you cast Holy Word twice, first cast getting 4 rounds of deafness and 3 rounds of blindness, second getting 1 round of deafness and 8 rounds of blindness. After the deafness from the second casting expires, even though the deafness of the first casting still has duration, it has no effect since the second casting still has duration. Basically, you cant layer on the same spell with random durations for multiple effects to get the best durations from amongst the castings, you only get the last casting til it expires, then if the second to last casting still has duration on some effects they apply, and so on until all the spells have expired.
I think this scenario is specifically covered under a different part of Combining Magic Effects section, which follows:
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.
or possibly:
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.
This can be found here.
If these cover the scenario you mention far more aptly than "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.", why include this rules text at all?
I've asked for some clarification about those two sections as well here.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
So Confusion will not stack because it applies a specific single effect and there is not a choice to cause different affects.
In the case of Confusion, I'm not sure I'd agree. Whether by choice or not, you are applying different affects using the spell... which the errata indicates stack. However after re-examining the spell, I'd say there is a strong argument for the spell granting the Confused condition, despite never mentioning the words 'condition' or 'Confused' anywhere in it.
Please allow a substitution of a different spell where the variable is chosen after casting... Say Blessing of Fervor?
If a single character with 3 different castings of Blessing of Fervor chooses 3 different benefits, per the Errata/FAQ they stack.
If I was countering my argument here, I'd say doesn't the spell say 'These effects are not cumulative with similar effects, such as those provided by haste or a speed weapon, nor do they actually grant an extra action, so you can't use it to cast a second spell or otherwise take an extra action in the round. Blessing of fervor does not stack with haste.'? Blessing of Fervor is not Haste nor is it a speed weapon, nor are the effects being chosen stacking with similar effects (like choosing 'Increase its speed by 30 feet.' and figuring out if it stacks with Boots of Striding and Springing, Expeditious Retreat, and the Monk class speed bonus.).
So this ruling means, each character within an entire party can pick out 3 different benefits with 3 just castings of this spell.
Really, why does the section stating "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." exist in the same game as the Errata/FAQ mentioned above? I feel as if the two are in direct contradiction of each other and I'd like clarification.
|
|
You just posted the same rules section twice, Same Effect with Differing Results, which is the rule in effect for holy word. Differing strength would apply to things like lesser effects for successful saving throws.
I posted 'Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths' and 'Same Effect with Differing Results', followed by a link to the source (in case a reader wants to see the whole section in it's entirety. I agree with you about the section titled 'Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths' would be the best section for dealing with multiple castings of Holy Word as you described it...
The nightmare of 'Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths' and 'Same Effect with Differing Results' I'll leave alone to be covered over at Dealing with Three False Life Spells, so i won't go into that here.
So that brings us squarely back to my original question. Why do you think "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." exists in the game?
|
|
I am still confused by your point. You in the post you first replied to me stated that Same Effects with Differing Results was one of your two options for dealing with Holy Word. You then ask what the rule Same Effects with Differing Results applies to, and again in this post, you posted and talked about the exact same text.
Ah... Sorry. Doing too many things at once.
The quote after 'Or Possibly' should have instead been, "One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant: Sometimes, one spell can render a later spell irrelevant. Both spells are still active, but one has rendered the other useless in some fashion."
I meant to be asking, if we took the solution this rules text provides "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." out of the game (because I think the Errata/FAQ is doing just that); what spells would become problems unsolved by the rest of the Stacking Effects section. Or what value does this section provide that the rest of the Stacking Effects section already does not cover?
So Confusion will not stack because it applies a specific single effect and there is not a choice to cause different affects.In the case of Confusion, I'm not sure I'd agree. Whether by choice or not, you are applying different affects using the spell... which the errata indicates stack. However after re-examining the spell, I'd say there is a strong argument for the spell granting the Confused condition, despite never mentioning the words 'condition' or 'Confused' anywhere in it.
Please allow a substitution of a different spell where the variable is chosen after casting... Say Blessing of Fervor?
If a single character with 3 different castings of Blessing of Fervor chooses 3 different benefits, per the Errata/FAQ they stack.
If I was countering my argument here, I'd say doesn't the spell say 'These effects are not cumulative with similar effects, such as those provided by haste or a speed weapon, nor do they actually grant an extra action, so you can't use it to cast a second spell or otherwise take an extra action in the round. Blessing of fervor does not stack with haste.'? Blessing of Fervor is not Haste nor is it a speed weapon, nor are the effects being chosen stacking with similar effects (like choosing 'Increase its speed by 30 feet.' and figuring out if it stacks with Boots of Striding and Springing, Expeditious Retreat, and the Monk class speed bonus.).
So this ruling means, each character within an entire party can pick out 3 different benefits with 3 just castings of this spell.
Really, why does the section stating "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." exist in the same game as the Errata/FAQ mentioned above? I feel...
It is the same effect, always. You are causing the confused condition. The table below just explains how the confused condition functions. If you look up the confused condition, the same table appears (outside of the spell). It's also not a spell where a choice is made, you cause an effect and, each round thereafter, a roll is made to determine what happens to the character. But you cannot be doubly confused, so casting confusion a second time would only renew the duration of confusion.
Blessing of Fervor, I'm not actually sure how to handle it. You don't make a selection when casting the spell, (it's not a situation like Blindness/Deafness) the recepient of the spell makes a choice how it affects them round by round. I think it's more similar to Confusion (though Confusion no one can control what happens), and thus you couldn't cast it twice and choose two different benefits. However, I'm not 100% sure on this. It is a more complicated exmaple than others.
|
|
The rule one effect makes another irrelevant does not cover the case of spells with multiple effects with independent random durations. Making something irrelevant is having say bull's strength on you than casting transformation. Transformation renders Bull's strength irrelevant because it grants the same benefit for the duration of Transformation, but when Transformation expires you still have Bull's Strength if it has not expired. So I keep telling you, this rule affects spells that have overlapping effects that are not identical in either value or duration, only the last applies.
Let's take the Holy Word example used previously. In round 1, a 13th level cleric casts Holy word on a 8th level fighter and the fighter fails his the will save. After the dice are rolled he's suffering from 4 rounds deafened, 8 rounds blinded, and 5 minutes of paralyzed. Round 3 he's caught in a second Holy Word with 4 rounds deafened, 8 rounds of blinded and 2 minutes of paralyzed. Round 5 after that he's hit with a 3rd Holy Word and he finally makes his save with a natural 20. Now let's apply each section of the spell stacking rules independently of each other to see what they would do.
"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." We are also assuming that different strengths applied to the number rolled on the dice (instead of Spell Level or Caster Level).
Round 1: Deafened 4 rounds, 8 rounds blinded, 50 rounds of paralyzed.
Round 2: Deafened 3 rounds left, 7 rounds blinded, 49 rounds of paralyzed.
Round 3: Deafened 4 rounds left, 8 rounds blinded, 48 rounds of paralyzed.
Round 4: Deafened 3 rounds left, 7 rounds blinded, 47 rounds of paralyzed.
Round 5: Deafened 2 rounds left, 6 rounds blinded, 46 rounds of paralyzed.
Round 6: Deafened 1 rounds left, 5 rounds blinded, 45 rounds of paralyzed.
The entire duration of the paralyzed condition is 50 rounds.
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.
Round 1: Deafened 4 rounds, 8 rounds blinded, 50 rounds of paralyzed. Round 2: Deafened 3 rounds left, 7 rounds blinded, 49 rounds of paralyzed.
Round 3: Previous spells trumped. Deafened 4 rounds left, 8 rounds blinded, 20 rounds of paralyzed.
Round 4: Deafened 3 rounds left, 7 rounds blinded, 19 rounds of paralyzed.
Round 5: Previous spell trumped. Deafened 0 rounds left, 0 rounds blinded, 1 rounds of paralyzed.
Round 6: Deafened 1 rounds left, 5 rounds blinded, 18 rounds of paralyzed.
The entire duration of the paralyzed condition is 71 rounds, during which time this poor fighter's hearing and sight keep coming and going as trumps leave with him likely terrified out of his mind as the effects aren't corresponding to when he's rolling the saves for them.
Also this would not apply to Transformation and Bulls Strength because they are not the same spell and this clause only affects situations of the same spell.
Instantaneous Effects: Two or more spells with instantaneous durations work cumulatively when they affect the same target.
Round 1: Deafened 4 rounds, 8 rounds blinded, 50 rounds of paralyzed. Round 2: Deafened 3 rounds left, 7 rounds blinded, 49 rounds of paralyzed.
Round 3: Deafened 6 rounds left, 14 rounds blinded, 68 rounds of paralyzed.
Round 4: Deafened 5 rounds left, 13 rounds blinded, 67 rounds of paralyzed.
Round 5: Deafened 4 rounds left, 12 rounds blinded, 67 rounds of paralyzed.
Round 6: Deafened 3 rounds left, 11 rounds blinded, 66 rounds of paralyzed.
This results in 6 consecutive rounds of deafened, 16 consecutive rounds of blinded, and 71 consecutive rounds of paralyzed.
While I think it obvious that this last scenario is the only one tha should be considered with Holy Word whose duration is instantaneous... I wrote out these examples because the first two rules texts being applied to other spells like Ray of Enfeeblement would not fall under the Instantaneous Effects rules text.
Let's say we have a 3rd level wizard with only two Ray of Enfeeblement spells left in his 3rd combat of the day, with a Troll Barbarian the party has little hope of defeating and no hope of fleeing from. In round 1 before the Troll Barbarian acts he hits it with Ray of Enfeeblement and it fails it's save, the wizard rolls a 3 so the Troll Barbarian has a 4 penalty to his strength for 3 rounds. In round 2, he hits it with Ray of Enfeeblement again and it again fails it's save, the wizard rolls a 1 though so the Troll Barbarian has a 2 penalty to his strength for 3 rounds.
"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." Again we are assuming that by 'different strengths' this clause means the number rolled on the dice (instead of Spell Level or Caster Level).
Round 1: 3 rounds of a 4 strength penalty.
Round 2: 2 rounds of a 4 strength penalty.
Round 3: 1 round of a 4 strength penalty.
Round 4: 1st casting has ended. 1 round of a 2 strength penalty.
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.
Round 1: 3 rounds of a 4 strength penalty.
Round 2: 1st casting is trumped, 3 rounds of a 2 strength penalty.
Round 3: 2 rounds of a 2 strength penalty.
Round 4: 1st casting has ended. 1 round of a 2 strength penalty.
Now you might say that the 'Same Effect with Differing Results' rules text is not applicable here; but then I ask when is it applicable? Please keep in mind the Errata/FAQ I mentioned.
|
|
Blessing of Fervor, I'm not actually sure how to handle it. You don't make a selection when casting the spell, (it's not a situation like Blindness/Deafness) the recepient of the spell makes a choice how it affects them round by round. I think it's more similar to Confusion (though Confusion no one can control what happens), and thus you couldn't cast it twice and choose two different benefits. However, I'm not 100% sure on this. It is a more complicated exmaple than others.
Because I could see the strong argument for Confusion granting the single effect of the condition of Confused I pretty much conceded the Confusion was not a good example; which is why I switched it to Blessing of Fervor.
Blessing of Fervor does not grant a single effect of The Condition of Sped-Up with the Sped-Up condition then presenting the choice outside of the spell.
Going back to the Errata and FAQ, and replace each instance of 'evil eye' with 'Blessing of Fervor', and each instance of the word 'hex' with the word 'spell'...
"This doesn't violate the general rule for stacking penalties--each Blessing of Fervor effect is basically a different source, even though they stem from the Blessing of Fervor spell (the Blessing of Fervor spell is much like 5 separate weak spells under a common umbrella). In the same way that multiple castings of bestow curse on the same target should stack as long as they do different things (penalize Strength, penalize Dex, penalize attack rolls, take no action, and so on), multiple uses of the Blessing of Fervor spell stack as long as they're targeting different game statistics."
Seems pretty perfectly parallel to me.
Also seems that the Errata only cares about the targeting of different game statistics, not when the choice for the different statistics is made or who or how the choice is made. (And let's face it, with all the spells like Holy Word and Color Spray that make choices after being cast based on the level of the target, I think that's a good thing.)
thrikreed you are incorrect, but I do admit they should have explained it better. Almost nobody is going to use your interpretation, but that does not mean it should not be fixed.
Confusion gives you the confused condition which would only overlap and not stack. You may need to do another FAQ to ask when a spell with multiple outcomes only applies once, and when it can apply multiple times.
thrikreed you are incorrect, but I do admit they should have explained it better. Almost nobody is going to use your interpretation, but that does not mean it should not be fixed.
Confusion gives you the confused condition which would only overlap and not stack. You may need to do another FAQ to ask when a spell with multiple outcomes only applies once, and when it can apply multiple times.
I try, but sometimes I'm just not the best at it. I understand the reasoning, but conveying it isn't always my strong point.
|
|
Blessing of Fervor: The spell effects grants one choice to the target. They cannot gain benefits of multiple castings, since all they will ever get is 1 choice. If the spell said you can cast the spell to grant one of those benefits for the entire duration, then you could stack multiple castings.
Each casting is presenting a choice; much like the FAQ/Errata for a witch's Evil Eye Hex and the mentioned Bestow Curse which says: "This doesn't violate the general rule for stacking penalties--each evil eye effect is basically a different source, even though they stem from the evil eye hex (the evil eye hex is much like 5 separate weak hexes under a common umbrella). In the same way that multiple castings of bestow curse on the same target should stack as long as they do different things (penalize Strength, penalize Dex, penalize attack rolls, take no action, and so on), multiple uses of the evil eye hex stack as long as they're targeting different game statistics."
Nowhere in this spell does it say when the choice is being made, just that they stack as long as they're targeting different game statistics. Yes, that's official Errata/FAQ text. I've included links to it in my original post.
The second scenario you present for Holy Word is the correct, but I don't know where you got the 71 rounds of paralyze, its only 50. Scenario Three does not apply, you dont layer on the effects of holy word, stacking durations. Instantaneous Effects applies to spells like Cure Light Wounds, where if you receive multiple Cures in a single round, they all heal, instead of only the strongest.
I get 71 rounds because A. Holy Word says "Duration instantaneous" and B. because Combining Magic Effects has the text "Instantaneous Effects: Two or more spells with instantaneous durations work cumulatively when they affect the same target." included in the text. Those are clickable if you need to see the source. Surprisingly I can honestly say that 48 hours ago I was completely unaware of this rules text. None the less, it is there.
Scenario one applies to spells like Death Knell, the temporary hit points don't stack, you only get the one granted by the best roll. If you still had temp hp from a different casting when the best expires, you would retain those temp hp until they expire, and so on, but damage would remove temp hp from all castings currently on you.
Okay.
Let's hypothetically say Scenario One (Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths) is correct for dealing with multiple castings of the same spell with higher numerical values (again ignoring the lack of definition for strength).
Let's also hypothetically say that the FAQ/Errata is correct for dealing with spells that target different game statistics.
Now let's look at the question my original post asked... Question: What is the point of having "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." clause in the game? I'm looking for two or three examples of a spell stacking with itself which does not fit in our hypothetical Scenario One or the Errata/FAQ.
And I can't think of a single example, scenario, spell, or effect it would apply to... Unless the trumping/irrelevant text is causing something odd to happen like our Scenario 2.
And if Scenario 2 is not correct, and Scenario 1 and the Errata/FAQ are both correct; what is the point to "Same Effect with Differing Results"?
|
|
thrikreed you are incorrect
I can certainly appreciate you taking the time to state your opinion of me being in a general state of incorrect-ness. I hope you can appreciate my taking the time to state my opinion of your opinion being incorrect.
Almost nobody is going to use your interpretation, but that does not mean it should not be fixed.
My interpretation? Of what? Which rule? Which example? This is pretty reminiscent of a student turning in his test blank, the teacher asking him why, and him saying 'I didn't like one possible answer of one multiple choice question.' then walking out the door.
This is particularly frustrating because I have posted multiple possible interpretations for multiple rules in an effort to shine a light on the rules text I am trying to get a better handle on.
Confusion gives you the confused condition which would only overlap and not stack.
Thank you for agreeing with what I said twice prior to your post?
You may need to do another FAQ to ask when a spell with multiple outcomes only applies once, and when it can apply multiple times.
So you think another FAQ thread should be created to answer some of the questions that were brought up in this FAQ thread? What would be a good name for the new FAQ thread? What do you think about the name "SPELL STACKING: EVIL EYE, BESTOW CURSE, BLESSING OF FERVOR, RAY OF ENFEEBLEMENT, RESIST ENERGY, ETC."? What do you think should be the exact wording of the very first post to fully explain to everyone what is being exactly is being asked? Are there examples that should be cite too?