Do two Guardian weapon bonuses stack?

[Qayinisorouse]

Hey guys!
As a way to make my Eidolon less weak VS will i decided to get a weapon with the Guardian Enchantment and ALWAYS transfer that bonus to my Saves.

Question is, the guardian bonus says "Stacks with all" does that mean if i dual-wield two Guardian +1 swords (costs 8000) they will have the same effect as one "Guardian +9 (costs 9000) swords? or since their origin is "the same", they won't?

it also occurred to me that since Eidolons only have a limit on NATURAL attacks, i could use the swords to deal damage as well.

[Calth]

It would fall under the same source. Just like two casters casting the same spell don't stack.

Also, you would have to attack with the guardian weapon to get any benefit per the defending enchantment FAQ. Merely holding the weapon with no intent to attack negates the enchantment.

[vhok]

yes they would stack. different sources that both say stacks with everything.

[oneyou]

Either:
1. The guardian property is giving the bonus. This means the bonus would not stack as you have two bonuses from the same source (and the guardian bonus only stacks with other bonuses).
(Think of this as treating the guardian property like a spell, you can only get one bonus derived from the property.)

2. The weapons are giving the bonus. Here you have two bonuses to saves which stack with all other bonuses. So they should stack.

To me, reading the property gives me the impression that it is 1.
It is not exactly clear which is the case.

And as Calth said, you will need to attack with the weapon to get the bonus due to the defending faq. (Defending and guardian have very similar wording, and trigger in the same way.)

[Cavall]

vhok wrote:

yes they would stack. different sources that both say stacks with everything.

No. They aren't different sources.

[Rub-Eta]

I'm sure that you can't apply both weapons to the same save, granting up to +10 in one would just be silly and I'm sure it's not intended.

[vhok]

it says stacks with everything. not everything except other guardian bonuses.

[Rub-Eta]

Doesn't matter. There's also rules stating that the same source can't grant a bonus twice. That's the rule for Dodge bonuses as well, which are stated to stack with each other.

[vhok]

two separate weapons is not the same source.

[CBDunkerson]

This was a huge debate for years with the Defending weapon property... people would get Defending Armor Spikes, Defending Shield Spikes, Defending Boot Blades, et cetera and stack them all up to a huge AC bonus.

That was eventually taken care of via a FAQ saying that you have to actually ATTACK with the weapon, and take the corresponding reduction to attack bonus, in order to get an AC bonus from each item.

Thus, I'd think the same logic should apply to Guardian weapons... save bonuses from multiple weapons stack, but you have to attack with each of the weapons (at reduced bonuses) to do so.

[Rub-Eta]

Seems very reasonable.

[James Risner]

Cavall wrote:

vhok wrote:

yes they would stack. different sources that both say stacks with everything.

No. They aren't different sources.

Same source never stack with itself (even when it says stacks with all) because same source only stack when it says stacks with itself.

Plus if it went to FAQ process, it'd also likely be limited to only Guardian weapons you used this turn.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

Guardian weapons follow effectively the same rules as Defending weapons, as evidenced by referencing the Defending property in terms of stacking and application in the property description. This means that the Defending property FAQ would also apply to the Guardian property for restrictions and limitations due to their relevance and interaction with each other in similar circumstances.

In addition, Guardian and Defending provide an untyped bonus to AC/Saves. Untyped Bonuses have this to say:

Bonus Types wrote:

Bonuses without a type always stack, unless they are from the same source.

So, because Guardian and Defending properties provide an untyped bonus, they would stack with other Untyped, Resistance, Racial, and other sorts of bonuses, but if I had 2 Defending or 2 Guardian properties and activated them this turn via attacking TWF (or substituting inbetween iteratives) they would not stack.

If the argument is that "they're an untyped bonus, so it doesn't matter!" the Temporary HP FAQ says the following:

FAQ wrote:

Generally, effects do not stack if they are from the same source (Core Rulebook page 208, Combining Magical Effects). Although temporary hit points are not a "bonus," the principle still applies...

...Temporary hit points from different sources (such as an aid spell, a use of energy drain, and a vampiric touch spell) still stack with each other.

So, in general, any effects from any source do not stack with themselves, unless it explicitly states "This stacks with itself," usually up to a specified limit, and based from the examples provided in the FAQ (which are spells or abilities), a weapon property becomes the source of receiving the untyped bonus to AC/Saves.

[CBDunkerson]

Ylleshka, conjoined twin Marilith from AP 77 (Herald of the Ivory Labyrinth) wields 12 +1 Defending longswords and her during combat block states;

"If she's being hit too often, she starts allocating bonuses from her defending longswords to her Armor Class."

Cue 'stat blocks can be wrong' argument in 3, 2, 1...

[Darksol the Painbringer]

CBDunkerson wrote:

Ylleshka, conjoined twin Marilith from AP 77 (Herald of the Ivory Labyrinth) wields 12 +1 Defending longswords and her during combat block states;

"If she's being hit too often, she starts allocating bonuses from her defending longswords to her Armor Class."

Cue 'stat blocks can be wrong' argument in 3, 2, 1...

Wouldn't be the first time NPC characters would be using incorrect rules, and wouldn't be the last.

After all, we have a boss from another AP who apparently gets to apply DR/- from taking damage through using a Vicious weapon, even though it does an untyped form of damage (presumably energy, according to the evidence), and to this day, that still functions as such. And that's not the only major inconsistency.

It makes more sense to say that "Those NPCs are special snowflakes who don't adhere to the normal rules," than it is to say "Those NPCs are incorrect." Because let's face it, several "incorrect stat blocks" are practically rules-lawyered/munchkin'd into working the way the tactic blocks say they should function.

[Drahliana Moonrunner]

CBDunkerson wrote:

Ylleshka, conjoined twin Marilith from AP 77 (Herald of the Ivory Labyrinth) wields 12 +1 Defending longswords and her during combat block states;

"If she's being hit too often, she starts allocating bonuses from her defending longswords to her Armor Class."

Cue 'stat blocks can be wrong' argument in 3, 2, 1...

As stated before, Paizo reserves the right to break it's own rules in order to provide unique encounters. Conjoined Twin Mariliths aren't found walking down your average street, even in Absalom. The example you're citing falls under the category of unique power of unique monster.

The rules are meant to set boundaries on player actions, not to restrict the creativity of GMs and authors.

[vhok]

can someone link to the defending FAQ?

[Darksol the Painbringer]

Here