Given that a bonus to one stat does not negatively interact with a bonus to another stat, can my Shory Aerialist stack his feat's +5 status bonus to Fly speed with his monk class' Incredible Movement status bonus to land Speed?
Normally like bonuses don't stack, but in this case we're not adding them to the same stat. One is applied to base land Speed while the other is applied to Fly speed; two different stats.
And since the fly spell's Fly Speed is equal to his land Speed, the IM bonus is already baked into his base Fly Speed.
Example: Aiuvarin Shory Human Monk 13 with Fleet, Nimble Elf, and Shory Aerialist
25 base Speed
05 Fleet
05 Nimble Elf
20 Incredible Movement
05 Shory Aerialist
==
60 Fly speed at Lvl 13
Do I have that right? Is this possible? Why or why not?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And since the fly spell's Fly Speed is equal to his land Speed, the IM bonus is already baked into his base Fly Speed.
That right there is the questionable part.
You gain a +10-foot status bonus to your Speed whenever you’re not wearing armor.
The ability gives a Status bonus to speed. It doesn't stop being a Status bonus just because another effect changes the movement type.
So if the character has a land speed of 25 base + 15 Status bonus, then the Fly spell would give them a fly speed of 25 base + 15 Status bonus. Or rather, Fly would give them a fly speed of 25 because that is their base land speed and Incredible Movement would add a 15 Status bonus because it applies.
I don't like the idea of lumping all of the speed bonuses and boosts together and then stripping the bonus types when doing the conversion to a different speed. It does feel like you are double-dipping to then take a bonus of the same type that was already applied to the base speed and apply it to the converted movement speed.
And since the fly spell's Fly Speed is equal to his land Speed, the IM bonus is already baked into his base Fly Speed.That right there is the questionable part.
You gain a +10-foot status bonus to your Speed whenever you’re not wearing armor.The ability gives a Status bonus to speed. It doesn't stop being a Status bonus just because another effect changes the movement type.
So if the character has a land speed of 25 base + 15 Status bonus, then the Fly spell would give them a fly speed of 25 base + 15 Status bonus. Or rather, Fly would give them a fly speed of 25 because that is their base land speed and Incredible Movement would add a 15 Status bonus because it applies.
I don't like the idea of lumping all of the speed bonuses and boosts together and then stripping the bonus types when doing the conversion to a different speed. It does feel like you are double-dipping to then take a bonus of the same type that was already applied to the base speed and apply it to the converted movement speed.
Even if the RAW did support RD's interpretation, as a GM I would absolutely apply your logic and say "No, it doesn't work that way at my table".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Given that a bonus to one stat does not negatively interact with a bonus to another stat, can my Shory Aerialist stack his feat's +5 status bonus to Fly speed with his monk class' Incredible Movement status bonus to land Speed?
Normally like bonuses don't stack, but in this case we're not adding them to the same stat. One is applied to base land Speed while the other is applied to Fly speed; two different stats.
And since the fly spell's Fly Speed is equal to his land Speed, the IM bonus is already baked into his base Fly Speed.
Example: Aiuvarin Shory Human Monk 13 with Fleet, Nimble Elf, and Shory Aerialist
25 base Speed
05 Fleet
05 Nimble Elf
20 Incredible Movement
05 Shory Aerialist
==
60 Fly speed at Lvl 13Do I have that right? Is this possible? Why or why not?
This is an interesting question and I think the answeris this: you either get a 55 foot land speed and a 40 foot fly speed; or you get a 55 foot land speed and flight speed.
Incredible Movement says we get a status bonus to Speed. The rules are clear:
"Whenever a rule mentions your Speed without specifying a type, it's referring to your land Speed."
So your shoony's land speed is 35 feet (25 base, +5 fleet, +5 nimble elf) and you're getting a 20 foot status bonus, for a total of 55.
fly says you get a flight speed equal to your speed or 20 feet, whichever is greater.
However, I couldn't find any rule, anywhere, that says we add bonuses to your land speed for the purpose of conversion. In game terms, your Speed is 35, you're just getting a 20 foot status bonus if you don't wear armor.
Since the bonus is always going to be "on", and for ease of bookkeeping, I can see people glomming them together, but in that case Aerialist wouldnt apply because it's a lower bonus, so you end up with both at 55.
I think the more correct interpretation is 55 and 40 though.
|
Ambiguous rule => TGTBT => Only the highest status bonus applies.
We can also describe it as Fly speed = Land speed + 5 status (Shory Aerialist)
And Land speed = 25 (base) + 5 (Fleet) + 5 (Nimble Elf) + 20 status (Incredible Movement)
So Fly speed = 25 (base) + 5 (Fleet) + 5 (Nimble Elf) + max (20 status (Incredible Movement) , 5 status (Shory Aerialist)).
Because status bonuses do not stack.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Given that a bonus to one stat does not negatively interact with a bonus to another stat, can my Shory Aerialist stack his feat's +5 status bonus to Fly speed with his monk class' Incredible Movement status bonus to land Speed?
Normally like bonuses don't stack, but in this case we're not adding them to the same stat. One is applied to base land Speed while the other is applied to Fly speed; two different stats.
And since the fly spell's Fly Speed is equal to his land Speed, the IM bonus is already baked into his base Fly Speed.
Example: Aiuvarin Shory Human Monk 13 with Fleet, Nimble Elf, and Shory Aerialist
25 base Speed
05 Fleet
05 Nimble Elf
20 Incredible Movement
05 Shory Aerialist
==
60 Fly speed at Lvl 13Do I have that right? Is this possible? Why or why not?
This is an interesting question and I think the answeris this: you either get a 55 foot land speed and a 40 foot fly speed; or you get a 55 foot land speed and flight speed.
Incredible Movement says we get a status bonus to Speed. The rules are clear:
"Whenever a rule mentions your Speed without specifying a type, it's referring to your land Speed."
So your shoony's land speed is 35 feet (25 base, +5 fleet, +5 nimble elf) and you're getting a 20 foot status bonus, for a total of 55.
fly says you get a flight speed equal to your speed or 20 feet, whichever is greater.
However, I couldn't find any rule, anywhere, that says we add bonuses to your land speed for the purpose of conversion. In game terms, your Speed is 35, you're just getting a 20 foot status bonus if you don't wear armor.
Since the bonus is always going to be "on", and for ease of bookkeeping, I can see people glomming them together, but in that case Aerialist wouldnt apply because it's a lower bonus, so you end up with both at 55.
I think the more correct interpretation is 55 and 40 though.
Just to make sure I'm processing what you're saying...you're argument is basically "Incredible Movement only applies to land based movement. So you'll get 55 ft when on the ground. But you'll get 40 because your base speed is 35, and then you apply Shory bonus for +5 fly speed".
That's pretty reasonable.
Under no circumstances, to RD's original question, would you stack incredible movement and shory aerialist.
ust to make sure I'm processing what you're saying...you're argument is basically "Incredible Movement only applies to land based movement. So you'll get 55 ft when on the ground. But you'll get 40 because your base speed is 35, and then you apply Shory bonus for +5 fly speed".
That's pretty reasonable.
Under no circumstances, to RD's original question, would you stack incredible movement and shory aerialist.
Yes, that's exactly what I mean.
There is no doubt that Incredible Movement does not apply to flight speeds. The ability applies a status bonus to speed, and the rules tell us when abilities refer to speed, it is only land speed.
So if Ravingdork's Shory Monk was Dragonblooded and took True Dragon's Flight, they would gain a flight speed of 20 feet, increased to 25 thanks to Shory aerialist. Incredible movement would not apply for flight, but it would apply to their land speed.
But if your flight speed is based on your land speed, do we include the bonuses or not? That's the ambiguous part.
In most games I've played and run the answer has been "Yes" just for ease of bookkeeping, but this isn't as clear cut and can really go either way.
However, because Incredible Movement and Shory Aerialist are status bonuses, they would never stack if we add Incredible Movement to determine our flight speed. You get the highest, as usual.
Paizo has stated on items and such before that if you have a fly, swim, climb speed that is correlated to you normal speed, your special speed can't get a bonus from the same type. E.g. look at the soaring rune.
A set of soaring armor helps you fly faster and protects you and nearby allies from falling. While wearing soaring armor, you gain a +10-foot item bonus to your fly Speed, if you have one. As normal, if your fly Speed is based on your land Speed and you already have an item bonus to your land Speed, these bonuses aren't cumulative.
So, normal rules apply. You can't stack a bonus applied to your land speed to your fly speed. If flight is based of land, then it uses the land speed. No stacking status bonuses. But if your fly speed was based on your land speed, and your land speed had a circumstance bonus, but no item bonus, then you could use an item bonus for fly speeds on your fly speed. Or if you had a status bonus to both land and fly speed, and flying status bonus was larger, I'd argue you'd gain the difference between the two.
E.G. Land speed= 35 using 25 base + 10 from status bonus, and Fly speed = Land Speed + 20 Status Bonus to flight specifically, then you'd have fly speed of 45
Paizo has stated on items and such before that if you have a fly, swim, climb speed that is correlated to you normal speed, your special speed can't get a bonus from the same type.
Source?
In most games I've played and run the answer has been "Yes" just for ease of bookkeeping, but this isn't as clear cut and can really go either way.
This is how I intend to handle it in my games.
It's not exactly game breaking and I don't see much point in making a ruling that could diminish my players' fun.
Paizo has stated on items and such before that if you have a fly, swim, climb speed that is correlated to you normal speed, your special speed can't get a bonus from the same type.Source?
In most games I've played and run the answer has been "Yes" just for ease of bookkeeping, but this isn't as clear cut and can really go either way.This is how I intend to handle it in my games.
It's not exactly game breaking and I don't see much point in making a ruling that could diminish my players' fun.
Source: https://2e.aonprd.com/Equipment.aspx?ID=920 . The Item I quoted verbatim the text for. To which, the words 'As Normal' means what the item is saying isn't the exception, it is the standard notion. The Soaring Rune which albeit came out pre remaster in the Ancestry guide, but hasn't been changed in all the erratas post remaster, to which the source here had it's last given errata for the remaster last on May 17, 2024, well during the end of the remaster release given it started in 2023.
But also just the general rule revolving around bonuses which is here. https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2281 . Granted the rule section covering bonuses mostly follows listed is mostly talking about checks, but it also goes over things like Armor Class and saving throws, so I can't imagine you wouldn't assume it also translates to speeds. You can't have multiple status bonuses to something, and while speed at face glance isn't that game breaking, you have to look at it more in terms of, 'How many actions does my player save by having 60 speed over 40?'
That does make the RAI/intent pretty clear.
Still doesn't change the fact that you have two separate bonuses being applied to two different stats per RAW.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But if your flight speed is based on your land speed, do we include the bonuses or not? That's the ambiguous part.
Is it ambiguous? If your land speed is 55 and your flight speed is your land speed then your flight speed is also 55.
I'm not seeing any rule that lends credence to the idea that you should use some other number.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If your land speed is 55 and your flight speed is your land speed then your flight speed is also 55.
I'm not seeing any rule that lends credence to the idea that you should use some other number.
It has been mentioned in this thread already.
Is your land speed actually 55? Or is your land speed instead 35 plus a 20 foot Status bonus?
So when you get a Fly speed equal to your land speed, are we supposed to include all of the bonuses to it of various types? Or only the base land speed?
And when answering these questions, be sure to include rule citations that support your claims or else the response will not settle the ambiguity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does it say base unmodified land speed? Is there any othe precedent for something like that being in the rules without it being explicitly stated?
The Stride action says "Move up to your Speed"
The Fly spell says gain a Fly speed equal to your Speed.
I'm sorry but I feel like if you're arguing that these actually refer to completely different numbers despite using the exact same word maybe you should be offering a citation here.
Or do you think Incredible Movement doesn't apply to Strides either?
If neither of us can offer citations or clarify things into a logically consistent set of wording that is used universally in the rules, then that shows that the rules are ambiguous.
Which is all that I am trying to prove at this point. So my work here is done.
If you want to claim that the rules are not ambiguous, then you are taking on that burden of proof.
If you want to claim that the rules are not ambiguous, then you are taking on that burden of proof.
The rules are not ambiguous at all. ;P
Not a big deal. I wouldn't fight the player on this. I would allow it. What's 55 v. 60?
For what it's worth, I just tested it in Foundry, and it does indeed "stack": https://imgur.com/a/aPPofbl
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If neither of us can offer citations or clarify things into a logically consistent set of wording that is used universally in the rules, then that shows that the rules are ambiguous.
Not really? If you're presenting an alternative theory of how the game works you need to back that up. "We both have opinions therefore it's ambiguous" is not an articulation of the position.
Which is all that I am trying to prove at this point. So my work here is done.
by completely sidestepping the actual rules being discussed? That's not work that's just being contrarian.
The idea that the definition of Speed is meant to change in very specific contexts with no indicator text is not just quibbling over some wording quirk it's proactively defining a specific exception to how the game works normally. If references to a value are intended to mean the unmodified value then bonuses never apply ever. That's not really a position you can handwave away.
That's not work that's just being contrarian.
Hey! What's so bad about that?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Has anyone mentioned Swashbuckler and the Panache bonus to Speeds yet?
My understanding of the ruling for that is because it mentions Speeds in the plural rather than the singular Speed, that the bonus applies to all movement types, not just land speed.
So would you allow a Swashbuckler with Panache to gain their Status bonus to their land speed, convert that to a fly speed with the Fly spell, and then add their Panache bonus to Speeds to that fly speed again?
-----
And yes, there is a difference between making a claim that something is a valid ruling and claiming that something is the only valid ruling.
Most people don't outright claim that their proposed ruling is the only valid ruling. Instead they try to do so indirectly by saying things like "Everything else is homebrew and people refusing to accept what is written plain in front of them." or "Is it ambiguous?"
But the result is the same. You are still trying to claim that your understanding and proposed ruling is the only valid ruling. The annoying part is that you are doing so by shaming the opposing ruling proposals rather than actually disproving them.
In order to maintain a clam that a ruling proposal is a valid ruling, you only need to show that the rules do not contradict it.
In order to maintain a claim that a ruling proposal is the only valid ruling, you need to actively invalidate all other proposed rulings.
So by asking "Is it ambiguous?" you appear to be trying to maintain the claim that the only valid ruling is that the base fly speed granted by the Fly spell should be including all of the status bonuses to land speed but without continuing to track them as status bonuses.
While I can concede that this proposed ruling is a valid ruling, I am not going to concede that it is the only valid ruling.
You still have to prove that part if you want to claim the ruling is unambiguously the only ruling - by actively disproving the alternative proposed ruling that Bonuses of the same type do not stack, the base fly speed granted by the Fly spell should be equal to the base land speed, and the bonuses to land speed may or may not then also apply to the granted fly speed at the GM's discretion, and that further bonuses to the fly speed would not stack if they are the same bonus type as one that is already applied to the converted land speed.
So I am not sidestepping any issues. I am insisting that you follow the standards of burden of proof for formal debates. Show where the alternative proposed ruling is invalid - show something in the rules that contradicts that ruling proposal.
Don't just bring up more places in the rules that are ambiguous (such as the wording of "Stride up to your speed") and think that this somehow shows that the rules are not ambiguous.