Please double check my math.
Heavy Steel Shield - 20gp - Hardness 10, Hit Points 20
Large Size - 20gp (Double Base) - Double Base Hit Points to 40
Adamantine - 3,000gp (Masterwork Included) - Increase Hardness to 20
+1 Enhancement to Defense (Armor) - 1,000gp - Increase Hardness +2 and Hit Points +10
+1 Enhancement to Offense (Weapon) - 2,000gp - Increase Hardness +2 and Hit Points +10
Impervious - 3,000gp - Double Weapon Hardness to +4 and Hit Points to +20
Cost 9,040gp
Hardness 26
Hit Points 70
I wanted to be sure that Hardness and Hit Points are affected by both the enhancement to the armor side as well as the weapon side.
I do not want to start another discussion about whether or not it should be treated as a weapon for Adamantine cost purposes. That is how I see it and how my current DM sees it, so we are good there.
I also wanted to see if that is how Impervious would work. It is a weapon enhancement so I see it only increasing the weapon side of the enhancements per the chart under Additional Rules: Breaking and Entering in the CRB.
So please let me know if that looks like it is done correctly per the rules.
I would not stack the enhancement bonus for weapon and shield, only apply the highest.
24/60
I would not stack the enhancement bonus for weapon and shield, only apply the highest.
24/60
I thought about that but I came to the conclusion that it says both
"Add +2 for each +1 enhancement bonus of magic items"
and
"Add 10 hp for each +1 enhancement bonus of magic items"
at the bottom of the chart and there is no distinguishing between enhancement bonus for offense and enhancement bonus for defense so they should each get added to the total.
The character is paying for the upgrades to both so he should get the benefit of both. The weapon/armor is superior in cost to most so it is also superior in durability.
If they just wanted to use Shield Master to add the defensive enhancement bonus to the shield without actually adding any enhancement bonus to the offensive side of a shield, then they would not get the increase to Hardness and Hit Points.
Also, the Impervious is only affecting the offensive side as it says
"An impervious weapon gains double the normal bonus to its hardness and hit points for each point of its enhancement bonus"
It calls out weapon and it is added to the weapon side so only that side is affected by it.
Just my reading of the rules, but thank you for your viewpoint as well.
Bonuses from the same source don't stack. Bonuses of the same named type don't (usually) stack. I feel it falls foul of at least one of those, possibly both.
Counter argument: they are derived values without a type.
It's a conservative reading of the rules, I admit.
The difference when you have +5 weapon/+5 shield is not insignificant. You are looking at 50/190 vs 40/140. Then again it's hardness/hitpoints, at this point maybe you don't need to be conservative.
Invest in a Fortifying Stone for 1,000 GP.
DC +5, HP +20, but as temp hp. If not used up, Make Whole can restore fully.
/cevah
Invest in a Fortifying Stone for 1,000 GP.
DC +5, HP +20, but as temp hp. If not used up, Make Whole can restore fully./cevah
Sweet! Done! Thanks for the extra advice!
Invest in spellcasting:
Hardening @ 12th adds +6 hardness for a casting cost of 720 gp.
/cevah
There is a dwarven clerical spell, level 3, that I believe doubles the HP of things that it is cast upon. I can't remember the name of it, however, nor could I find it quickly.
Note that weapons and armor made of Steel normally, if made of adamantine, have HP increased by 1/3. So your base HP should be 53, not 40.
Hardening adds 1/2 caster level to Hardness, as well.
Enhancement bonuses do not stack. Enhancement bonuses to HP and Hardness are among those things. So, no stacking them. You only get the higher of the two.
Magic Shields are treated as magic armor for masterwork and enhancement purposes by default. If your DM is willing to let you go with $3000, then fine. But the default would be $5000. iF you go down to Mithral, you will note the shield costs the same as light armor, while weapons have a separate cost on their own.
So, following the Mithral precedent, the shield would be priced as light armor. But if the DM is letting you go with 'as weapon', that's fine.
==Aelryinth
There is a dwarven clerical spell, level 3, that I believe doubles the HP of things that it is cast upon. I can't remember the name of it, however, nor could I find it quickly.
Helps to remember the name....
Rune of Durability (Sor/Wiz 3), cost to pay for a casting: 150 gp.
EDIT: Oops. You meant the Forgemaster-(cleric) Runeforger (Su) ability with the Durability rune.
Forgemasters are priestly dwarves who are ritual casters and expert enchanters, able to produce their rune-graven armaments with astonishing speed.
Runeforger (Su): A forgemaster may inscribe mystical runes upon a suit of armor, shield, or weapon as full-round action, using this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + her Intelligence modifier. These runes last 1 round per cleric level, but inscribing the same rune twice on an item increases this duration to 1 minute per level, three times to 10 minutes per level, and four times to 1 hour per level. Erase affects runes as magical writing. A forgemaster learns forgemaster's blessing at 1st level and may learn one additional rune at 2nd level and every 2 levels thereafter. Only one type of rune marked with an asterisk () may be placed on an item at any given time. This ability replaces channel energy.Durability: The inscribed item's hardness increases by an amount equal to the forgemaster's Wisdom modifier, and its hit points increase by an amount equal to twice her level.
/cevah
Large Heavy Adamantine Shield: 3040 gp, hard 20, hp 53
+1 Defense: hard +2, hp +10, 1000 gp
+1 Offense: hard +2, hp +10, 2000 gp
Impervious (armor): hard +2, hp +10, +1 bonus (+3000 gp)
Impervious (weapon): hard +2, hp +10, +3000 gp
Fortifying Stone: 1000 gp
Hardening @ 12th: hard +6, 720 gp
Rune of Durability: double hp, 150 gp. -- Not sure where to apply the double.
Cost 13,760gp
Hardness 39
Hit Points 113+[53 or 113] = 166 or 226
I think either Impervious (armor) is not worth it until you have at least a +2 because +1(Impervious) and +2 have the same hard, hp, & price.
Impervious (weapon) is worth it, only because it is a flat cost less than a +1 bonus.
Given how hard this is, I would skip both Impervious enchants, and instead invest in a higher level caster for Hardening. [Each +2 CL is +120 gp gets hard +1.]
Above without the Impervious enchants:
Cost 7,760gp
Hardness 35
Hit Points 93+[53 or 93] = 146 or 186
A 20th level caster of Hardening adds:
Cost 480 gp
Hard +4
/cevah
As noted before, the enhancement bonuses will not stack. They both enhance the same things...the hardness and hit points of the object.
If you are specifically noting that your DM is allowing you to make an exception to this rule, please note this.
The Rune of Durability would apply last.
So with a CL 12 Hardening and Impervious Adamantine shield +1, you're at Hardness 30 and HP 146.
And no, I didn't mean the Forgemaster. If you look at the source of the spell, it's from Dwarves of Golarion, and part of the fluff of the spell description was that it was known only to the dwarves, and part of the mystique behind 'dwarfcrafted items'.
==Aelryinth
Well, the spell index lists the following from Dwarves of Golarion:
Ancestral Communion (bard 2, cleric/oracle 2)
Ancestral Gift (bard 4, cleric/oracle 4)
Oath Of Justice (cleric/oracle 3, paladin 2)
Rune of Durability (sorcerer/wizard 3)
Rune of Warding (sorcerer/wizard 3)
See Through Stone (druid 4, ranger 3)
Summon Ancestral Guardian (bard 3, cleric/oracle 3)
Tactical Formation (cleric/oracle 3, paladin 3, ranger 4)
There is no 3rd level clerical spell that does what you say. There is a 3rd level wizard spell, which I linked, but since you mentioned clerical, I dug further for a clerical hardening and found the Forgemaster.
By the way, the Impervious enhancement doubles the hardness and hit point bonus, so if you have both, then you triple the bonus.
Since each +1 enhancement to hardness and hit points stacks with itself, why would the two sources of enhancement not stack? They apply to different things, and are clearly allowed to exist side by side.
/cevah
As noted before, the enhancement bonuses will not stack. They both enhance the same things...the hardness and hit points of the object.
The bonuses to hardness and hit points are untyped, not enhancement. Granted, they do come because of an enhancement bonus on the item, but the bonuses themselves are not typed and therefore stack.
Magic Armor, Shields, and Weapons: Each +1 of enhancement bonus adds 2 to the hardness of armor, a weapon, or a shield, and +10 to the item's hit points.
Even if they don't stack, the item does still have 2 separate +1 enhancement bonuses, and receives the hardness/hp boost from both.
Enhancement bonuses do not stack.
The target of the enhancement bonuses is the same...the hardness and hit points of the object. In effect, you are enhancing the shield's hardness by 2 and HP by +10.
They are indeed derived from a +1 enhancement, so it is 'same source' and does not apply twice. Weapon and armor are immaterial...they come from an enhancement bonus.
This is exactly the same reason why the enhancement bonus to attack rolls if you have shield master and weapon enhancements will not stack. Enhancement bonuses to the same item, and same sources, don't stack.
You are attempting to say "Because one source is a weapon, and the other is armor, these enhancement bonuses stack."
That is exactly like trying to say "Because this bonus is from the weapon side, and this bonus from the armor side, these bonuses to hit stack."
Nope. It's all one object. There is no 'side'.
The bonuses from the enhancement bonuses are same source, and same target, no stacking.
And note if Impervious doubles HP, Rune of Durability will only stack on another set (the double double = triple rule).
So, nope. Now, if your DM chooses to let them, that's his call. But RAW, just because you're enhanced as armor and weapon doesn't mean everything is twice as strong.
As for the Rune of Durability: please keep in mind that I had not read the spell description in at least a couple of years, so if I mistook a sorc spell for clerical, it should be entirely believable if I couldn't even recall its proper name.
==Aelryinth
Again, the bonus to hardness and hit points are not enhancement bonuses. They are untyped bonuses.
Magic Armor, Shields, and Weapons: Each +1 of enhancement bonus adds 2 to the hardness of armor, a weapon, or a shield, and +10 to the item's hit points.
It does not say "adds +2 enhancement bonus to the hardness of armor, a weapon, or a shield, and +10 enhancement bonus to the item's hit points."
They are not enhancement bonuses.
They are same source AND same target. They are from an enhancement bonus. Your distinction is immaterial.
The rules also say "Each +1 of Enhancement bonus also increases the Th and Dmg of a weapon by +1, and each enhancement bonus on an armor or shield increases the armor value by +1."
The point stands. TH/Dmg are also typeless. It's irrelevant. The boost is from a enhancement bonus as an additional side effect of each +1. They do NOT stack.
==Aelryinth
They are same source AND same target. They are from an enhancement bonus.
+1 Armor is an enhancement to armor.
+1 Shield is an enhancement to shield.You get both enhancement bonuses to AC when using both because what they apply to are different things.
+1 Shield is an enhancement to shield AC (defense).
+1 Weapon is an enhancement to a weapon BAB (offense).
You get both of these as well, when on the same shield. With the right feats, you even get both at the same time.
The bonuses increase of hardness and hit points, is with an untyped bonus, not an enhancement bonus. While they are from similar sources, they are not the same source. Therefore should stack.
Would you rule that a +5 shield would only get a single instance of +2 Hardness and +10 hit points? Each +1 is being called out separately. If pluses from different enhancements don't stack, then why should ones from the same source stack? By your rules there would only ever be a single instance of +2/+10. As that does not make sense, that implies the assumed non-stacking is incorrect.
Enhancement bonuses do not stack.
The target of the enhancement bonuses is the same...the hardness and hit points of the object.
Agreed enhancement bonuses don't stack. But the target of the enhancement is not the hardness and hit points of the shield. The targets are the defensive and offensive ability of the shield. Two different targets, thus both bonuses apply fully. Part of that bonus is an increase (not enhancement, since no type is called out) of hardness and hit points. Since both enhancements apply, both increases apply.
And note if Impervious doubles HP, Rune of Durability will only stack on another set (the double double = triple rule).
Except that they target different sets of hit points. Impervious targets the hit points gained by enhancements to the object, while the rune targets all the hit points. Using both Impervious enchants does invoke the double-double = triple rule, but the rune does not, since nothing else is targeting the entire set of hp. I could see an argument that it does not apply to the increase from the Impervious enchantments, and maybe even the enhancement bonus hut points, but in my opinion, it should apply to the total after enhancement and impervious.
/cevah
... Adamantine - 3,000gp (Masterwork Included) - Increase Hardness to 20 ...
... weapons and armor normally made of steel that are made of adamantine have one-third more hit points than normal.
Does not appear you have calculated that into the numbers.
If I missed it my bad.
No, Cevah. Just...no.
The +2/+10 part of improving hard/hp is just as much part of the raw enhancement bonus as a +1 to armor or to TH/DMG.
The improvement is coming from an enhancement bonus. it doesn't matter if that enhancement bonus is helping AC or TH/DMG. It's an enhancement bonus, and a side effect.
It's going TO the same place...hp/hardness. So it's coming from same source, enhancement bonus and going to the same place, hp/hardness.
Enhancement bonuses don't stack. Even though it would be considered an enhancement bonus to hp/hardness under the rules (since it is clearly derived from such), regardless, the source (enhancement bonus) is the same, even if it is typeless. The target, hp/hardness, is also the same.
There is no distinction between weapon and armor enhancement bonuses that happen to do the same thing.
Or do you think that if someone suddenly gains shield master, and your shield enhancement bonus now affects th/dmg rolls as a weapon, your now-weapon shield enhancement to hp/hardness is suddenly lost because it is now officially a 'weapon' enhancement, too?
No, your method makes the bonus situational. The intent of the rule is quite clear, and it's not to have shields suddenly double stacking hp and hardness because they can be enhanced as both weapons and armor. They are both the same thing, the enhancement bonuses are single sources that in this case happen to also share one common characteristic, and so do NOT stack.
Trying to fine point the language to make an exception to a very broad, very clear rule is a clear sign of trying to rules lawyer a loop hole. Please do not claim this is RAW...if your DM wants to rule it that way, fine, but it is definitely NOT RAW nor RAI.
=========
Gilfalas, base HP would be 40, increased by 1/3 is 53. Yep, pointed that out to him after his initial post.
THe wording on Impervious is very clear that it doubles only the enhancement bonus to HP.
Rune of Durability doubles all the hp, but the double double = triple rule is absolute, here. If the Rune doubled Impervious, that would be a quadrupling, so it will not apply.
So, you'll have base HP of 53. +1 non-stacking Enhancement adds +10 to 63. Since Impervious explicitly multiplies, and doesn't add a fixed amount, it will not itself be multiplied, and adds another +10.
Rune of Durability will double the HP before Impervious, which is 63, so we are at 126, and adding +10 from Impervious brings us to 136.
That is an incredibly tough shield any way you look at it. And every additional +1 enhancement is +4 hardness and +30 HP.
It's at Hardness 30 with a CL 12 Hardening spell granting +6. By the time you get it to a +5 shield, this thing is going to be 46 Hardness and 256 HP.
Go-go ray shield, I guess!
==Aelryinth
No, Cevah. Just...no.
The +2/+10 part of improving hard/hp is just as much part of the raw enhancement bonus as a +1 to armor or to TH/DMG.
The improvement is coming from an enhancement bonus. it doesn't matter if that enhancement bonus is helping AC or TH/DMG. It's an enhancement bonus, and a side effect.
Actually, the source is an enchantment. The enchantment provides a +1 Enhancement bonus to [shield ac|weapon bab] of the shield. It also provides +2 hardness and +10 hit points. Neither the hardness nor the hit point bonuses are typed.
It's going TO the same place...hp/hardness. So it's coming from same source, enhancement bonus and going to the same place, hp/hardness.
Going to the same place has nothing to do with it.
The sources are different. One is an enchantment for better defense, the other is an enchantment for better offense. These are clearly not the same because there exist shields with different bonus values for these two stats. Saying they are the same would mean you only get the best of the two numbers for the shield, and that number is applied to all effects. I.e. you are making a (+4 AC/+1 BAB) shield act as +4/+4. Clearly this is wrong, so the premise of saying the enhancements are the same source is also wrong.
Enhancement bonuses don't stack. Even though it would be considered an enhancement bonus to hp/hardness under the rules (since it is clearly derived from such), regardless, the source (enhancement bonus) is the same, even if it is typeless. The target, hp/hardness, is also the same.
It is NOT an enhancement bonus to hardness or hit points. See up-thread for the quote that shows the RAW.
For example, a +4 enhancement bonus to strength (bull's strength) gives you a +2 BAB bonus indirectly, since for every +2 strength, you get a +1 BAB. The increase to BAB is not an enhancement bonus. But according to you it would be.
There is no distinction between weapon and armor enhancement bonuses that happen to do the same thing.
There is no distinction to things that happen to do the same thing.
Weapon and armor enhancement bonuses do different things, with some overlap.Or do you think that if someone suddenly gains shield master, and your shield enhancement bonus now affects th/dmg rolls as a weapon, your now-weapon shield enhancement to hp/hardness is suddenly lost because it is now officially a 'weapon' enhancement, too?
Shield Master lets you use the defensive enhancement value as an offensive enhancement value. The defensive enhancement that would not stack with the offensive enhancement value. Shield Master does not change what the shield actually has, only how it affects your attack.
No, your method makes the bonus situational. The intent of the rule is quite clear, and it's not to have shields suddenly double stacking hp and hardness because they can be enhanced as both weapons and armor. They are both the same thing, the enhancement bonuses are single sources that in this case happen to also share one common characteristic, and so do NOT stack.
Bonus is constant. How is that situational?
Rule is quite clear. Hardness +2 Hit Points +10, for each +1 enhancement bonus.RAW, there is silence on the subject of enhancement on offense and defense parts of a shield used as a weapon. To say no double stacking, you need to come up with some verbiage.
Trying to fine point the language to make an exception to a very broad, very clear rule is a clear sign of trying to rules lawyer a loop hole. Please do not claim this is RAW...if your DM wants to rule it that way, fine, but it is definitely NOT RAW nor RAI.
Fine pointing language to get clarity on a complex interaction, however, is what this forum is about.
/cevah
No, to say no double stacking is conforming with the rules.
PERMITTING double stacking, YOU need to come up with some reason for double stacking enhancement derived bonuses, rather then simply proclaiming fiat.
As the Enhancement bonuses for weapon and armor do not stack, the bonuses derived from them do not stack, either.
Otherwise, as soon as you got the Shield Master feat, the defensive armor bonuses would now stack th/dmg with the weapon bonuses.
They don't.
It's a clear violation of stacking rules, and there is no language granting a clear exception except the one you are making by fiat.
It terms of HP and hardness, it does not matter which side of the cart the bonus comes from, it's all enhancement bonus, and it doesn't stack unless there's a rule specifically stating that it does so.
There is no such rule, and you're attempting to 'read one' into existence, which is very bad form.
-------
Shield Master would change Defensive Enhancement to effectively also be Offensive Enhancement.
Under YOUR Rules, that means it is now suddenly providing the same bonus the Weapon Enhancement side would be. But now, you couldn't make an artificial division between the two, since clearly the bonus is coming from the armor side for both sides. Offensive bonuses are the same, and are clearly equal to the defensive, meaning suddenly you'd lose the Weapon hardness/hp bonus since it's now transitive with the armor side.
The fact you are attempting to deny this hole in your logic does not help your argument.
I suggest you stop trying to be radical and overdo the defensive properties of your shield and stick to an established rule until you get a FAQ ruling that explicitly states that the bonus to Hard/HP from both the weapon side and armor side of enhancement bonuses to shields stack. As that would be an exception to every other stacking rule, and found only on one piece of equipment, the fact you are trying to force it as an exception is quite unusual.
Let it go, man. Your shield is good enough as it is. Don't be gloating that you've found another rules exploit...you haven't.
==Aelryinth
No, to say no double stacking is conforming with the rules.
PERMITTING double stacking, YOU need to come up with some reason for double stacking enhancement derived bonuses, rather then simply proclaiming fiat.
I said the rules are silent. You say there are rules. Prove it. Show me the RAW text.
As the Enhancement bonuses for weapon and armor do not stack, the bonuses derived from them do not stack, either.
Why do you persist on calling the hardness and hit point bonuses enhancement bonuses? They are not listed as such. They are, in fact, untyped.
To quote Jerra:
Magic Armor, Shields, and Weapons: Each +1 of enhancement bonus adds 2 to the hardness of armor, a weapon, or a shield, and +10 to the item's hit points.
It "adds 2 to the hardness", not "adds +2 enhancement to the hardness". To make them count as typed, you need to provide counter text. Until you do, the bonus is untyped, and thus stack.
Otherwise, as soon as you got the Shield Master feat, the defensive armor bonuses would now stack th/dmg with the weapon bonuses.
They don't.
It's a clear violation of stacking rules, and there is no language granting a clear exception except the one you are making by fiat.
Did you read what I said about the shield master? Apparently not, since I said it does not alter the shield in the least. I also said the defense and offense did not stack.
Claiming I said differently just to say I am wrong does not help your credibility.It terms of HP and hardness, it does not matter which side of the cart the bonus comes from, it's all enhancement bonus, and it doesn't stack unless there's a rule specifically stating that it does so.
There is no such rule, and you're attempting to 'read one' into existence, which is very bad form.
Since you base assumption (typed bonus) is wrong, it is understandable why you don't agree.
Claiming I am making up rules, when I am not, is also bad form.Shield Master would change Defensive Enhancement to effectively also be Offensive Enhancement.
It does not do that, so any conclusion based on that assumption is therefore wrong.
Under YOUR Rules, that means it is now suddenly providing the same bonus the Weapon Enhancement side would be. But now, you couldn't make an artificial division between the two, since clearly the bonus is coming from the armor side for both sides. Offensive bonuses are the same, and are clearly equal to the defensive, meaning suddenly you'd lose the Weapon hardness/hp bonus since it's now transitive with the armor side.
The fact you are attempting to deny this hole in your logic does not help your argument.
Conclusion based on that assumption.
I suggest you stop trying to be radical and overdo the defensive properties of your shield and stick to an established rule until you get a FAQ ruling that explicitly states that the bonus to Hard/HP from both the weapon side and armor side of enhancement bonuses to shields stack. As that would be an exception to every other stacking rule, and found only on one piece of equipment, the fact you are trying to force it as an exception is quite unusual.
Let it go, man. Your shield is good...
It is not MY shield, but the OP's. :-)
Were I trying to get ENHANCEMENT bonuses to stack, that would be an exception. I am not doing that. I am saying the UNTYPED bonus stacks. You are saying the TYPED bonus does not stack.
Jerra quoted the rules text. I referred to it, and include it here. It clearly shows the bonus is UNTYPED. Unless you can prove it otherwise with rules text, the bonuses will stack. No FAQ needed.
If you really want a FAQ, ask the question:
Maybe you will get some clicks.
/cevah
To me this is not a case of stacking of the same type of bonus. An enhancement bonus to the weapon improves the hardness and hit points and an enhancement bonus to the armor improves the hardness and hit points. It is a relatively minor issue but I do not read it that way. I do not believe that this is a case where anyone can claim RAW on their side as it is a corner case that does not really fit smoothly in the rules. A shield is both and armor and a weapon and few items make that claim so their is no clear direction.
Thanks for all of the input and advice and it is always worth a healthy discussion to get the blood flowing...
Cevah,
you are completely ignoring source. It is the core weakness of your argument.
Two bonuses from the same source do not stack. It doesn't have to 'name' them as 'types' of bonuses. And the source of your HP/Hardness is clearly the enhancement bonuses being applied to the item. The fact it does NOT name them is actually a strike against you, because if it did, and they were different, they would be different source and could thus stack.
Relying on them being untyped is irrelevant. Same source (enhancement bonus), same target, they don't stack. Period.
It's really just that simple.
As for the FAQ question, it would be: Do the bonuses to hardness and hit points from both Armor enhancements and Weapon Enhancements overlap or stack on the same item (i.e. only shields and shield type objects could do this). In other words, do you get +2 Hard/+10hp per each level of Armor Enhancement and +2/+10 per each level of Weapon enhancement on the same item?
Your question completely walks around the question because it simply quotes the rules as they stand, without drawing attention to the potential conflict which needs to be resolved.
==Aelryinth
Cevah,
you are completely ignoring source. It is the core weakness of your argument.
The sources are different. One is an enchantment for better defense, the other is an enchantment for better offense. These are clearly not the same because there exist shields with different bonus values for these two stats.
You call that completely ignoring source? Curious.
Disagreeing with me does not mean I am ignoring it.Saying I am ignoring it when I do not, then saying I should not ignore it just makes you look bad.
My calling them different is one premise. With some additional premises, laid out in the thread, I come to a conclusion. If you think I am wrong, you need to show how I failed to apply proper logic to the premises I gave, or that I gave bad premises.
Clearly, you think there is one source, and I think there are two sources. I gave you my reasoning on why they are different. Show me why I am wrong. "Because I said so" is not showing me. Misquoting me is not showing me.
Two bonuses from the same source do not stack. It doesn't have to 'name' them as 'types' of bonuses. And the source of your HP/Hardness is clearly the enhancement bonuses being applied to the item. The fact it does NOT name them is actually a strike against you, because if it did, and they were different, they would be different source and could thus stack.
An enhancement bonus is a type of number, not a source. An enchantment is a source. An enchantment can give an enhancement bonus. There are two different enchantments on the shield. One that does defense, and one that does offense. Yes, they are very similar, but they are not the same. They cost different amounts to apply, and they do different things. You are claiming they are the same. How then do you get +5 defense and +1 offense on a shield? If they are the same then you would have a +5/+5 shield, not a +5/+1 shield. This is why your claim is wrong.
Relying on them being untyped is irrelevant. Same source (enhancement bonus), same target, they don't stack. Period.
It's really just that simple.
Whoa! You are changing your tune now. If their type is irrelevant, then why have you argued so hard their being enhancement bonuses? Looks like you just admitted to loosing that point in the argument.
As for the FAQ question, it would be: ....
My listed question was just a suggestion. As I was not going to make a thread with it, I am fine on your revised text. Make a thread, link to it here, and I'll even click FAQ on it for you.
/cevah
Do the bonuses to hardness and hit points from both Armor enhancements and Weapon Enhancements overlap or stack on the same item (i.e. only shields and shield type objects could do this). In other words, do you get +2 Hard/+10hp per each level of Armor Enhancement and +2/+10 per each level of Weapon enhancement on the same item?
What about Armor & Armor Spikes?
What about Armor and a weaponized helm?/cevah