Bloodthirsty armor stacking

[DoubleBubble]

Does bloodthirsty armor bonus stack for every attack it made or just increase maximum by 1?

Say if I made 5 melee attacks while wearing bloodthirsty armor, does my armor bonus increase by 5 or still just 1?

Thank you.

[Lord Foul II]

Is a bonus type listed

[Franz Lunzer]

Bloodthirsty

Bloodthirsty wrote:

Such a set of armor promotes wanton bloodshed, as its enhancement bonus to AC increases by 1 for 1 round after its wearer deals damage with a natural attack or melee weapon. If the wearer of a suit of bloodthirsty armor is raging, the armor’s enhancement bonus increases by 3 instead.

It's not entirely clear, but I think the Intent is that it's just one increase per round, either +1 (not raging) or +3 (raging).

That would fall in line with the price of +2.

[DoubleBubble]

Oh! I read that wrong before. Thanks! I think it's +1 max for one round and +3 for rage. Thanks.

[Pizza Lord]

Bloodthirsty wrote:

Requirement: Only light or medium armor can be enchanted with the bloodthirsty special ability.

Jagged designs of lightning, fangs, or weaponry adorn any bloodthirsty armor, which bolsters its wearer's confidence and presence with each wound the wearer inflicts.

Bloodthirsty armor promotes wanton bloodshed, as its enhancement bonus to AC increases by 1 for 1 round after its wearer deals damage with a natural attack or melee weapon. If the wearer of a suit of bloodthirsty armor is raging, the armor's enhancement bonus increases by 3 instead.

Reading it, it says for every wound inflicted.

That means if you injure someone with two attacks while raging, it gets +3 on the first hit, then another +3 after the second hit. Then if your opponent provokes an AoO on his turn and you hit him, it goes up another +3. The first two increases will end just as your turn starts. The third bonus from the AoO, according to the way its written, will last until the start of the opponent's turn that provoked the AoO (or when it would be if he is dead now.)

If they want it to be once per round only, they didn't write it that way or give any evidence to that effect. On the other hand, they 'did' specify after every wound, and after dealing damage. So that's two specific indications of when the bonus is added.

[Oxylepy]

It's wearer can deal an infinite number of itterations of damage, and the end result would still be having dealt damage. It does not specify after every period of damage dealt, just that having been dealt a bonus is granted.

I like the idea of it stacking as much as the next bloke, but it would have stacking worded in there, if prior examples of wording are to be trusted

[Rysky]

The "with each wound the wearer inflicts" is in the flavor text, not the mechanics.

What it actually does it listed right below that.

[Franz Lunzer]

Pizza Lord wrote:

...

That means if you injure someone with two attacks while raging, it gets +3 on the first hit, then another +3 after the second hit. Then if your opponent provokes an AoO on his turn and you hit him, it goes up another +3. The first two increases will end just as your turn starts. The third bonus from the AoO, according to the way its written, will last until the start of the opponent's turn that provoked the AoO (or when it would be if he is dead now.)

If they want it to be once per round only, they didn't write it that way or give any evidence to that effect. On the other hand, they 'did' specify after every wound, and after dealing damage. So that's two specific indications of when the bonus is added.

How would that be in line with the +2 price?

[Pizza Lord]

Rysky wrote:

The "with each wound the wearer inflicts" is in the flavor text, not the mechanics.

What it actually does it listed right below that.

Yes, but that text also reinforces what is written below that, which is after dealing damage it increases the armor's enhancement bonus by +1 for 1 round.

Also in that part you claim tells you how it works, it says it promotes wanton bloodshed. How can you claim it's promoting wanton bloodshed if its bonus is just... normally hitting someone? That's exactly what someone would normally do.

Is that intended? I don't know. But how it's written, and how the text, whether flavorful or not, supports it is clear.

Now, there is a rule about effects from the same source not stacking more than once, I believe. That could be seen to apply here, and I'm fine with that. But the way it's written, and would have to be judged based on someone not having to dig through multiple other rulings, is that if you damage an opponent, there is an enhancement increase to armor.

Again, not saying that's how it's intended. But it doesn't say 'At the end of your turn if you damaged an opponent add +1 or +3 if raging' The only thing preventing it might be the multiple effects from the same source ruling (in which case if you hit a guy you gain +1 but then Rage and hit him with your second attack you get a +3 and that overrides the +1) but that's not how it's written on its own merits.

Franz Lunzer wrote:

How would that be in line with the +2 price?

How would it be? Well... you could...just get that +2 price as a +2 enhancement bonus anyway and then it would always be a +2 armor bonus and you wouldn't have to hit someone twice in a round to have a +2 bonus for 1 round. Do you think it makes more sense to cost as much as an all-the-time-every-time bonus with your interpretation (which is that it will only ever be a +1 no matter how wantonly you inflict bloodshed?)

I know what you're thinking, but if you're raging it's +3. Rage is a specific class skill, meaning this benefit is worthless without it.

Even trying to fool the armor with Use Magic Device would be a horrible use of time and actions and you then probably couldn't hit an opponent during a turn you succeeded in convincing the armor that you were raging (I don't even know if that works, you could convince it you had the Rage power I suppose, but having the ability doesn't mean diddly, you'd have to have it activated.)

So, rage is not common amongst characters and when it is, you can't rage forever and whenever you want all the time (and when you can you should be able to benefit from it.) Plus, it forces you into taking full-round actions to gain the benefit and it only applies when you succeed on a roll. That means ignoring miss chances, even at the best of times there's always a 5% chance it doesn't work. At the best of times. That's assuming on a 1 will miss. A more normal actual encounter probably has you reasonably miss on a 4 or less (that's 20%) and each extra attack typically is at a lower attack bonus (like -5 for each iterative).

So, yes, technically you could achieve a +15 enhancement bonus with stacking per hit (if you allow it) which probably sounds like a lot But remember you have to be raging that requires 5 attacks (barring opponents provoking AoOs) and at the time your making 5 constant attacks (ignoring the fact that one or more enemies are probably dead from your hits and you don't NEED any AC since anyone that could hit you other than ranged enemies are dead) you're probably at a level where you're dealing with touch attack enemies, rays, etc (since, those are the ones hanging back out of your melee reach).

Using a 10th-level barbarian as a baseline (which I think everyone will agree is a fair point for an example). You're looking at a base of 22 rounds of rage. Obviously there are ways to increase it if you want to use feats or talents or archetypes, but we're going with a fair reasonable example. 4 rounds at 1st and then +2 up for each level (+18). So 22 + Con (+5 is reasonable). So 27 rounds as a fair basis. That's less than 3 minutes of time and granted... 27 rounds 'might' be more than enough combat in a day... but that's subjective. What isn't subjective is a bonus that's always there, whether you're ambushed, or your opponent goes first in combat, or there's a trap that shoots at you, or any other occurrence where you don't get to hit a guy first and are in a rage.

So again, you want to know how is it in line with a +2 bonus?
Because unless you are specifically raging (not just able to rage) and specifically able to damage, not just hit, a target, you are paying for almost nothing over the course of your day unless your character is specifically made to take full advantage of this specific ability. Normally even if you hit an opponent 5 times in a round(!) you get a +5 bonus for one round! Or you could... just always have the +2. It is the exact same bonus! It's not like it applies to Touch AC, or incorporeal attack. It's the same type of bonus...you could have... all the time... everytime. It's makes even less sense if it only works once.

Again, I am only looking at how it's written on its own merits.

[DoubleBubble]

I wish Paizo would split their flavor text with the effects. Gets confusing. Why can't they do it like how they did with feats? So weird...

[Chess Pwn]

This seems kinda lame. Like if you're raging it is getting +3 for the price of +2 most of the time, but if you don't have rage you're paying +2 for +1. So unless your armor is already at +5 it doesn't seem that helpful.

[Franz Lunzer]

Thinking about this again, it's strange really.

If read the way I did up there (if you damage an opponent), it's simply a +1 to AC either way, because while raging you have a -2 penalty to AC. (Which is kinda nice, as you then have the same AC all the time... if you do damage...)

So I'm starting to think Pizza Lord has it right...

[DoubleBubble]

I just want to find the official answer here, but I do agree it will be lame if you get +3 AC at most in one round with this ability. This ability would be really cool for melee as it makes them more effective in their role. No mage can survive a war with millions of goblins. However, a warrior could without a sweat. You can really play those berserk scenes where you return to your friends after you slayed a hundred men. And to be fair, in games above level 8, making a melee attack is not easy. To make so many in one round is hard, so it sounds fair for them to have that many AC after their hard work.

[Pizza Lord]

Exactly. If Bloodythristy only works once a round, you are basically paying the same cost for a +2 enhancement bonus that you could have all the time for a possible/maybe +1 enhancement bonus... for 1 round. Even in the best case scenario, you could be raging and get a +3, but since rage typically gives you an AC penalty of -2... you're still getting +1 AC for 1 round.

[Rysky]

If you bought just a +2 enhancement then the Rage penalties would cancel it out. The enchant lets you still get the +1 it normally gives so you still get an actual bonus while raging.

There's also the fact of archetypes that don't give an AC penalty while raging as well as the Skald's Raging Song that only gives a -1.

[Chess Pwn]

Well it can also increase your armor over the +5. Cause if you had a +5 bloodthirsty and hit it increases to +6/+8

[Nevan Oaks]

After damage is dealt you gain a +1 to AC, not each time you deal damage (IMO). But if raging increase by +3 (not to +3) which would make the armour +4 (when raging).

[Rysky]

Nevan Oaks wrote:

After damage is dealt you gain a +1 to AC, not each time you deal damage (IMO). But if raging increase by +3 (not to +3) which would make the armour +4 (when raging).

Bloodthirsty wrote:

If the wearer of a suit of bloodthirsty armor is raging, the armor’s enhancement bonus increases by 3 instead.

[Nevan Oaks]

Sorry missed that one important word.

[Claxon]

Things never stack with themselves unless they specifically say they do.

So no, bloodthirsty will not stack with itself ever. You get the bonus that you get and only once per round.

[DoubleBubble]

I guess so, unfortunately. Would be cool if it wasn't, but knowing Paizo, I think Claxon might be right.

[Tac-One]

The armour bonus is not stacking, it is increasing.

CRB p.11 wrote:

Bonuses are numerical values that are added to checks and statistical scores. Most bonuses have a type, and as a general rule, bonuses of the same type are not cumulative (do not “stack”)—only the greater bonus granted applies.

If you take the interpretation that the bonus is from the same source and cannot be applied more then once, then the power is useless. Since you have to have at least a +1 magical armour bonus on the armour in order to put bloodthirsty on it, then the armour already has a magical armour bonus. Therefore, according to the "one time only" intepretation, you could not apply the second +1 armour bonus (since they are of the same type and do not stack).

On the other hand, if you accept that "increases by 1 for 1 round after its wearer deals damage" simply means what it says and the "armour bonus" is not being applied multiple times but simply increases to the stated number, then stacking is not an issue.

This not only meets the clearly defined RAI of "with each wound the wearer inflicts", but it actually makes the enhancement worth purchasing for a select group of individuals.

You still have to hit with multiple attacks and it still goes away at the end of your turn. That means it is a +2 enhancement bonus that does not work at all before your first set of full attacks, does not work when you can't get into melee, does not work when you are slowed, etc, etc.

On the other hand, if you are a raging character with multiple attacks and are able to hit with all of them, you could have a temporary armour bonus of perhaps +15 on your medium or light armour while raging. Giving you an AC of perhaps 45 (assuming you are focused on AC)? Something easily achievable by other AC focused characters at your level.

Not sure why people feel the need to try to restrict what was obviously meant to be an option for a very select group of characters and is made completely clear in the flavor description and only unclear in the rules section if you make multiple rules assumptions.