Does this stack!?

[Snowbluff]

Okay, so! Same type bonuses! Do they stack if they come form a different source?! I am asking because:

A) Sinfire Titan says Meldshapers can get amazing bonusers, but they are all frakking Insight Bonuses!

B) I keep getting the woefully inadequate response "Bonuses from the same source don't stack". "Insight" isn't a source, is it? Source means like using a spell or item right?

C) I'd like to stack more damage on my Sapphire Hierarch's arrow damage (It's like 4d6+30 right now), but I already have Knowledge Devotion, which is Insight, and soulmelds are addicted to Insight bonuses, and aren't going cold turkey anytime soon.

[Ernir]

Okay, so! Same type bonuses! Do they stack if they come form a different source?!
No, they don't.


A) Sinfire Titan says Meldshapers can get amazing bonusers, but they are all frakking Insight Bonuses!
Not aaaaall of them. What specific bonus was he referring to?


B) I keep getting the woefully inadequate response "Bonuses from the same source don't stack". "Insight" isn't a source, is it? Source means like using a spell or item right?
Insight is a bonus type. Bonuses of the same type (almost) never stack. See Modifier Types. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/theBasics.htm#modifierTypes)

Untyped bonuses stack if they are not from the same source.


C) I'd like to stack more damage on my Sapphire Hierarch's arrow damage (It's like 4d6+30 right now), but I already have Knowledge Devotion, which is Insight, and soulmelds are addicted to Insight bonuses, and aren't going cold turkey anytime soon.
Where are the rest of your damage bonuses coming from? +30 damage isn't very shabby, if you have enough attacks.

[JoshuaZ]

Same type does not stack unless it is a dodge bonus or a circumstance bonus. Relevant bit from the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/theBasics.htm):



In most cases, modifiers to a given check or roll stack (combine for a cumulative effect) if they come from different sources and have different types (or no type at all), but do not stack if they have the same type or come from the same source (such as the same spell cast twice in succession). If the modifiers to a particular roll do not stack, only the best bonus and worst penalty applies. Dodge bonuses and circumstance bonuses however, do stack with one another unless otherwise specified.

So two bonuses that are the same type *say both insight bonuses), even if they are from different sources, don't stack.

[Snowbluff]

No, they don't.


Not aaaaall of them. What specific bonus was he referring to?


Insight is a bonus type. Bonuses of the same type (almost) never stack. See Modifier Types. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/theBasics.htm#modifierTypes)

Untyped bonuses stack if they are not from the same source.


Where are the rest of your damage bonuses coming from? +30 damage isn't very shabby, if you have enough attacks.

Okay, Thanks for the link ^^

As for my damage, it's +9 Str (bow is variable Str, Righteous MIght, Divine Power, Holy Transformation), +6 Enh (Raptor Arrow Omni-bane®, +4 more Enh from Greater Magic Weapon), +7 Holy Warrior Reserve Feat, +5 Collison Splitting Bow (Collison is untyped), and +5 insight for Knowledge Devotion (Never leave home without it).

[Lonely Tylenol]

Okay, Thanks for the link ^^

As for my damage, it's +9 Str (bow is variable Str, Righteous MIght, Divine Power, Holy Transformation), +6 Enh (Raptor Arrow Omni-bane®, +4 more Enh from Greater Magic Weapon), +7 Holy Warrior Reserve Feat, +5 Collison Splitting Bow (Collison is untyped), and +5 insight for Knowledge Devotion (Never leave home without it).

Remember that thing about like bonuses not stacking?

The +6 and +4 enhancement bonuses don't stack, since they're both enhancement bonuses.

Also, how did you get a weapon with a +6 enhancement, plus collision, plus... Omni-Bane? Wouldn't that be epic-level?

[Curmudgeon]

B) I keep getting the woefully inadequate response "Bonuses from the same source don't stack". "Insight" isn't a source, is it? Source means like using a spell or item right?
No, as Ernir pointed out, insight is a bonus type. A bonus source is the name of whatever gives the bonus. For instance, the Monk class has an ability named AC Bonus, which provides an untyped bonus to armor class. AC Bonus is the source of this bonus. Another example of a bonus source is Sneak Attack.
Sneak Attack

This is exactly like the rogue ability of the same name. The extra damage dealt increases by +1d6 every other level (1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, and 9th). If an assassin gets a sneak attack bonus from another source (such as rogue levels) the bonuses on damage stack. Normally, bonuses to damage from the same source (Sneak Attack) wouldn't stack. This highlighted exception allows them to stack even though the source is the same (i.e., same name in both Rogue and Assassin classes).

[tyckspoon]

Remember that thing about like bonuses not stacking?

The +6 and +4 enhancement bonuses don't stack, since they're both enhancement bonuses.

Also, how did you get a weapon with a +6 enhancement, plus collision, plus... Omni-Bane? Wouldn't that be epic-level?

Bane (everything) is the relic power of a Raptor Arrow. And I think the breakdown was (arrow or bow) +4 enhancement from GMW, +2 for Bane property = +6 total, not +6 and +4.

[Lonely Tylenol]

Bane (everything) is the relic power of a Raptor Arrow. And I think the breakdown was (arrow or bow) +4 enhancement from GMW, +2 for Bane property = +6 total, not +6 and +4.

Oh. Makes sense.

Sorry, I thought the +6 Enh, omni-bane, and +4 from GMW were somehow unrelated. Silly me.

[Lyndworm]

Also, how did you get a weapon with a +6 enhancement, plus collision, plus... Omni-Bane? Wouldn't that be epic-level?
Although many things have been done incorrectly, here, that one makes sense to me. The phrase "Omni-Bane" refers to the Raptor Arrow's relic property, which makes it gain the Bane property against whatever you target (but not whatever you hit, interestingly enough). I believe that instead of increasing the Raptor Arrow's enhancement bonus by +2, Snowbluff changed the bonus to +2, which, when added to greater magic weapon's +4, is a total of +6 (as mentioned, however, these bonuses shouldn't stack, meaning that you only take the higher bonus of +4). Raptor Arrows are pretty great at just 6,006gp.

The spells seem to stack as well, with righteous might giving +4 size to Strength, divine power adding +6 enhancement to Strength, and holy transformation giving +4 sacred to Strength, totaling a legitimate +14, which, when coupled with a base Strength of 14/15, would be a total of +9 Strength to damage.

The Bone Bow, from Frostburn, has 1d10 base damage and a self-adjusting Strength rating. When the OP's size is increased by righteous might, his base damage moves up to 2d6. Coupled with the Raptor Arrow and greater magic weapon, that's 4d6+13 (although he calculated it a little higher). Once you add in the +7 untyped from Holy Warrior, the +5 untyped from Collision, and +5 insight from Knowledge Devotion, you get your 4d6+30, exactly like Snowbluff claimed.



Partially Swordsaged... Eh.

[tyckspoon]

The Bone Bow, from Frostburn, has 1d10 base damage and a self-adjusting Strength rating. When the OP's size is increased by righteous might, his base damage moves up to 2d6.

This is.. kind of a wishful thinking reading of the Bone Bow. All it says is 'functions as a composite bow with regard to applying the user's strength rating'. Well, a composite bow doesn't self-adjust; you have to have it made and set at the correct rating. So why do people read 'functions as a composite bow' as 'automatically uses the correct strength'? That's not how a composite bow functions!

Edit: The Bow of the Wintermoon and (Hank's) Energy Bow both do explicitly adjust as a special property, and are fairly inexpensive for the level of the character he's describing. Kind of annoying to figure out the pricing for adding other properties to them, but that's par for dealing with specific items anyway.

[Lyndworm]

On second look, you seem to be 100% correct. I can't really remember why I thought that it worked that way, but I remember very distinctly that I (very, very quickly) glanced over the entry a few weeks ago, and it seemed to dispel my doubts about how it functioned (since I'd read in many places previously that this was how it worked, which seemed dubious to me).

I was aware of the other two bows you mentioned, but was apparently quite confused. For some reason I was thinking that the Energy Bow's auto-adjustment applied only to its energy arrows, and I thought that the Bow of the Wintermoon's auto-adjustment applied only as a relic power. I was wrong on both counts; thanks for bringing it up.

OK, since it's not a Bone Bow (or at least it shouldn't be), the Energy Bow's increased damage wouldn't affect the Raptor Arrow, and the Bow of the Wintermoon would only deal 1d10 damage at Large size, how is the OP pulling off 2d6 base damage? I suppose he could already be Large sized (or have Powerful Build), but I feel like he would have mentioned that earlier.

[Snowbluff]

Although many things have been done incorrectly, here, that one makes sense to me. The phrase "Omni-Bane" refers to the Raptor Arrow's relic property, which makes it gain the Bane property against whatever you target (but not whatever you hit, interestingly enough). I believe that instead of increasing the Raptor Arrow's enhancement bonus by +2, Snowbluff changed the bonus to +2, which, when added to greater magic weapon's +4, is a total of +6 (as mentioned, however, these bonuses shouldn't stack, meaning that you only take the higher bonus of +4). Raptor Arrows are pretty great at just 6,006gp.

The spells seem to stack as well, with righteous might giving +4 size to Strength, divine power adding +6 enhancement to Strength, and holy transformation giving +4 sacred to Strength, totaling a legitimate +14, which, when coupled with a base Strength of 14/15, would be a total of +9 Strength to damage.



Partially Swordsaged... Eh.

Don't worry about the bow. I was going to dissassemble my Wintermoon got the property, but the DM and I decided it'd be better just to house rule in variable strength to EVERY composite bow, not just the silly relic or Force ones.

2 things. The arrows have GMW, which makes their base Enh Bonus +4. The Bane Property increases the present Enh bonus to +6.

Remember that thing about like bonuses not stacking?

The +6 and +4 enhancement bonuses don't stack, since they're both enhancement bonuses.

Also, how did you get a weapon with a +6 enhancement, plus collision, plus... Omni-Bane? Wouldn't that be epic-level?

Oh yes it is. GMW on Bany Raptor Arrows give if Epic DR Penetration. :D
The bow has the other properties, since it imparts them onto the arrows. It's how archery is supposed to be done.



OK, since it's not a Bone Bow (or at least it shouldn't be), the Energy Bow's increased damage wouldn't affect the Raptor Arrow, and the Bow of the Wintermoon would only deal 1d10 damage at Large size, how is the OP pulling off 2d6 base damage? I suppose he could already be Large sized (or have Powerful Build), but I feel like he would have mentioned that earlier.

I am using the Righteous Might Spell, which makes me large. According to the chart in the PHB on page 114, d10 becomes 2d8, and d8 (my longbow) becomes 2d6.

[Lyndworm]

Don't worry about the bow. I was going to dissassemble my Wintermoon got the property, but the DM and I decided it'd be better just to house rule in variable strength to EVERY composite bow, not just the silly relic or Force ones.
Not incredibly unbalanced; ranged has even less nice things than melee.


2 things. The arrows have GMW, which makes their base Enh Bonus +4. The Bane Property increases the present Enh bonus to +6.
Hmm... I'm not sure that works, actually. The Bane entry says "its effective enhancement bonus is +2 better than its normal enhancement bonus," and it's normal enhancement bonus doesn't include the effects of greater magic weapon.


I am using the Righteous Might Spell, which makes me large. According to the chart in the PHB on page 114, d10 becomes 2d8, and d8 (my longbow) becomes 2d6.
...You're right. I was thinking 1d8 -> 1d10 -> 2d6, but I know that that's wrong. It's never been right. Ever. :smallsigh:

[Curmudgeon]

Hmm... I'm not sure that works, actually. The Bane entry says "its effective enhancement bonus is +2 better than its normal enhancement bonus," and it's normal enhancement bonus doesn't include the effects of greater magic weapon.
Yes, that's ambiguous, and a DM could rule that this bane wording with its absolute language provides a situational override to the usual way weapon enhancements work. However, then the effect of +1 bane magic weapon would always be +3 total enhancement when attacking the specific designated foe, even with Greater Magic Weapon +5 added. The +5 enhancement would operate against every other type of foe.

Personally, I'm not that mean a DM.

[Snowbluff]

Yes, that's ambiguous, and a DM could rule that this bane wording with its absolute language provides a situational override to the usual way weapon enhancements work. However, then the effect of +1 bane magic weapon would always be +3 total enhancement when attacking the specific designated foe, even with Greater Magic Weapon +5 added. The +5 enhancement would operate against every other type of foe.

Personally, I'm not that mean a DM.

Well, I read Normal as "Enh w/out Bane". I under stand it could be a liberal interpretation. :P

But the Larger of the 2 Enh will always be used (They both always apply, but don't stack).

[Otomodachi]

To address a tiny part of the OP, I'm away from my books at the moment, but I assume the Lucky Dice soulmeld tosses out luck bonuses? I hope so or my head asplode. Person_Man is probably typing some insightful post about soulmelds as I type this. :P

[Curmudgeon]

But the Larger of the 2 Enh will always be used (They both always apply, but don't stack).
I don't see that as a viable interpretation. Either the language of bane is overriding the effective enhancement bonus of the weapon (Its effective enhancement bonus is +2 better than the normal enhancement bonus versus the designated foe.), or it's not. You don't get to treat the word "is" as an overridable term if you treat "normal" as a non-overridable term. Pick absolute or relative, but be consistent within that single sentence, please.