Courageous Enchantment

[CGNefarious]

So I'm playing a bloodrager and one of the combinations I was looking at for my weapon enchantments is courageous and furious. Now I get how those two interact, but what I'm curious about is how multiple weapons with the courageous property interact. This is the relevant text:

"In addition, any morale bonus the wielder gains from any other source is increased by half the weapon's enhancement bonus (minimum 1)."

So if my bloodrager, who has two claw attacks, has and amulet of mighty fists with the courageous property, would all my morale bonuses then increase by two? One increase for each enchantment? It's not a bonus but an increase to an already existing bonus, which leads me to believe that it would indeed stack by RAW.

The thing where it gets kind of crazy would be when I turn into a dragon at later levels and have 6 natural weapons. That would add +6 to all my morale bonuses.

So is this how it works? I've searching the forum but I found nothing. Was there any clarification for this or am I just reading it wrong/missing something?

[georgie_leech]

Ask your DM. Personally, the wording suggests to me that the stacking rules would apply normally; you have a named game element giving you a specific bonus, and it doesn't matter how many copies of such a thing are giving said bonus.

[Abd al-Azrad]

So if my bloodrager, who has two claw attacks, has and amulet of mighty fists with the courageous property, would all my morale bonuses then increase by two? One increase for each enchantment? It's not a bonus but an increase to an already existing bonus, which leads me to believe that it would indeed stack by RAW.

The thing where it gets kind of crazy would be when I turn into a dragon at later levels and have 6 natural weapons. That would add +6 to all my morale bonuses.

I am fairly confident Courageous does not work precisely like this. As in the Weapon Property's (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/magic-weapons/magic-weapon-special-abilities/courageous) description:


In addition, any morale bonus the wielder gains from any other source is increased by half the weapon's enhancement bonus (minimum 1).

So it doesn't grant you a bonus equal to the number of attacks you have. It grants you a bonus equal to half the weapon's raw Enhancement Bonus (so a +2 Courageous weapon grants 2 / 2 = +1 to the value of your current Morale bonuses).

It's still awesome, though. My table has more or less accepted this reading of the two properties. It does make access to Rage and this type of weapon a very attractive option for nearly any warrior type.

Do note that the Courageous property applies only half the weapon's Enhancement bonus as an increase in your Morale bonuses. But because, while raging, this also applies to your Morale bonuses to Str and Con, it can kind-of doubly apply to various rolls.

In my view, the best way to get this going is with a +2 Furious Courageous weapon. This gives only a 1-point increase to your morale bonuses when not raging - still nice, but nothing worth an effective +4 weapon. However, when raging, the Furious enchantment increases the weapon's effective bonus to +4. This means the Courageous enchantment can now increase your Morale bonuses by 2 points, which also means an extra 2 points to Str and Con because Rage provides Morale bonuses to those statistics - so, your Str increases by 2, your AB increases by 1, your damage increases by 1 or 1.5 (two-handed weapon); your Con increases by 2, your Fort save increases by 1, you get another HP / level on top of your Rage bonuses.

Which is even crazier if you're running Morale bonuses to other statistics or attributes. If you have a Heroism spell or effect active (which provides a +2 Morale bonus to Attacks, Saves and Skill Checks), the Furious Courageous weapon also applies half its (now Furiously-increased enhancement bonus of +4) to all Attack, Save and Skill Check rolls - on top of the less direct boosts granted by the same Furious Courageous weapon's boost to your Str and Con. If you manage to find a Morale boost to Damage (from, say, a Bard song), the +2 Furious Courageous weapon also increases by 2 points this Morale bonus as well.

In total, when you rage, you gain the following bonuses from this combo:

+2 Str
+2 Con
+2 Enhancement bonus to the weapon
+2 increase in your Morale bonuses to AB, Saves, Checks

=

+5 total AB
+3 damage (or +3.5 using the weapon 2-handed)
+2 all saves
+3 total Fort save
+1 HP / level
Bypass DR as if your weapon had 2 points higher enhancement bonus (so a +4 weapon bypasses DR / Silver, Cold Iron, Adamantine)

And that's on top of the bonuses from Rage, Heroism, the base +2 weapon's bonus, etc.

It is a very solid mid- to high-level weapon enhancement combo for a properly buffed warrior.

[CGNefarious]

So it doesn't grant you a bonus equal to the number of attacks you have. It grants you a bonus equal to half the weapon's raw Enhancement Bonus (so a +2 Courageous weapon grants 2 / 2 = +1 to the value of your current Morale bonuses).


What I'm saying is that the Amulet of Mighty Fists applies its enchantments to all the user's natural weapons, so it is as if all my natural weapons had the courageous enchantment.

For instance, let's say there was a TWF barbarian dual wielding two +1 courageous longswords. Would he still only get the +1 increase to morale bonuses, or would he get a +1 increase for each weapon?

[Fax Celestis]

What I'm saying is that the Amulet of Mighty Fists applies its enchantments to all the user's natural weapons, so it is as if all my natural weapons had the courageous enchantment.

For instance, let's say there was a TWF barbarian dual wielding two +1 courageous longswords. Would he still only get the +1 increase to morale bonuses, or would he get a +1 increase for each weapon?
Just the +1, I'm afraid.

Stacking Effects

Spells that provide bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes usually do not stack with themselves. More generally, two bonuses of the same type don't stack even if they come from different spells (or from effects other than spells; see Bonus Types, above).

Different Bonus Types

The bonuses or penalties from two different spells stack if the modifiers are of different types. A bonus that doesn't have a type stacks with any bonus.

Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths

In cases when two or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same target, but at different strengths, only the one with the highest strength applies.

Same Effect with Differing Results

The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts.

One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant

Sometimes, one spell can render a later spell irrelevant. Both spells are still active, but one has rendered the other useless in some fashion.

Multiple Mental Control Effects

Sometimes magical effects that establish mental control render each other irrelevant, such as spells that remove the subject's ability to act. Mental controls that don't remove the recipient's ability to act usually do not interfere with each other. If a creature is under the mental control of two or more creatures, it tends to obey each to the best of its ability, and to the extent of the control each effect allows. If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously, the competing controllers must make opposed Charisma checks to determine which one the creature obeys.

Spells with Opposite Effects

Spells with opposite effects apply normally, with all bonuses, penalties, or changes accruing in the order that they apply. Some spells negate or counter each other. This is a special effect that is noted in a spell's description.

Instantaneous Effects

Two or more spells with instantaneous durations work cumulatively when they affect the same target.

[Abd al-Azrad]

Just the +1, I'm afraid.

Well, not to nitpick excessively, but with a +1 Courageous weapon you wouldn't get anything. Again, the Courageous bonus only grants 1/2 the weapon's Enhancement bonus to your Morale effects.

But yes, Fax is also correct.

[CGNefarious]

There is a minimum +1 to the Courageous bonus.

I know the bonus stacking clause, but I guess I was assuming it didn't apply because Courageous doesn't actually give a bonus, but instead increases and already existing bonus. I'm probably just being overly pedantic, and it applying only once is most likely how it was intended to work.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Dude, it says minimum 1, so even a +1 courageous weapons gives at least 1 extra bonus, hell it is in the part you quoted.

[Fax Celestis]

There is a minimum +1 to the Courageous bonus.

I know the bonus stacking clause, but I guess I was assuming it didn't apply because Courageous doesn't actually give a bonus, but instead increases and already existing bonus. I'm probably just being overly pedantic, and it applying only once is most likely how it was intended to work.

Rule 2 (because rule 0 and rule 1 are already things): nothing ever stacks with itself unless it explicitly says it does.

[Necroticplague]

Just the +1, I'm afraid.

Counterpoint:These are magic items, not spells, while the rules you link clearly mentions spells.

Adtitional point:It does not provide "bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes". It increases the size of another bonus.

[Fax Celestis]

Counterpoint:These are magic items, not spells, while the rules you link clearly mentions spells.

So your argument is that resist energy and a ring of energy resistance stack because one is an item and the other is a spell?

Items are enchanted by spells and are effectively permanent spells: they are magic items and are therefore subject to the rules of the "Magic" chapter. They are beholden to the same rules as spells.


Adtitional point:It does not provide "bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes". It increases the size of another bonus.
Doesn't matter. The same effect does not apply more than once, or should a slow spell halve the target's speed if it affects him twice? Should a lodestone (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/cursed-items#TOC-Stone-of-Weight) still halve the target's speed if he already has one? No. One effect is made irrelevant by another.

[Necroticplague]

So your argument is that resist energy and a ring of energy resistance stack because one is an item and the other is a spell?
Neither do they stack, nor does one stop the other from working. They do different things. One gives you energy resistance to a certain energy type, the other causes you to subtract the ring's resistance value from damage dealt by one energy type. They don't even do the same thing enough for it to be a remotely good analogy.


Items are enchanted by spells and are effectively permanent spells: they are magic items and are therefore subject to the rules of the "Magic" chapter. They are beholden to the same rules as spells.
Not really. At least in Pathfinder, where its relevant, you aren't required to cast any spells to make a magic item, just know them (or have a magic item with the spell on it).


Doesn't matter. The same effect does not apply more than once, or should a slow spell halve the target's speed if it affects him twice? Should a lodestone (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/cursed-items#TOC-Stone-of-Weight) still halve the target's speed if he already has one? No. One effect is made irrelevant by another.
Slow wouldn't halve the speed because a:it's a spell, so follows rules for spells;b:specifically says it doesn't stack with itself (or other slow effects);and c:causes you to move "at half your normal speed", while the speed you move at as the result of a slow spell is not your normal speed.
Loadstones have a similar thing that makes them not stack, since they reduce your base land speed to half of normal.Heck, due to the language, carrying a loadstone, then being hit by a slow spell won't reduce you're land speed, since you're already at half your normal speed.

[Fax Celestis]

Fine. Two dark life rings (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/rings/dark-life-ring) make you subtract 10 damage? Two minor rings of inner fortitude (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/rings/ring-of-inner-fortitude) subtract 2 from ability damage?

[Abd al-Azrad]

Neither do they stack, nor does one stop the other from working. They do different things. One gives you energy resistance to a certain energy type, the other causes you to subtract the ring's resistance value from damage dealt by one energy type.

Sir, I do believe you engage in mockery.

[CGNefarious]

Fine. Two dark life rings (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/rings/dark-life-ring) make you subtract 10 damage? Two minor rings of inner fortitude (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/rings/ring-of-inner-fortitude) subtract 2 from ability damage?

Based on how they read I would say yes, though the bonus to will saves would not stack. This is assuming that they go by the bonus stacking rules and not the spell stacking rule, which I would say they don't since they are not spells.

[Fax Celestis]

Based on how they read I would say yes, though the bonus to will saves would not stack. This is assuming that they go by the bonus stacking rules and not the spell stacking rule, which I would say they don't since they are not spells.

Please note that the rule I referenced before (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic#TOC-Combining-Magic-Effects) was from the "Magic" section, not the "Spells" section, and as such covers magic items.

[CGNefarious]

Yet it specifically calls out effects not caused by spells when talking about bonus stacking, while the rest of it only seems to refer to spells specifically.

[Fax Celestis]

Yet it specifically calls out effects not caused by spells when talking about bonus stacking, while the rest of it only seems to refer to spells specifically.

You are welcome to that interpretation. I am of the mind that it is incorrect, but I am unable to find further evidence specific to Pathfinder that would support either of our claims.

[emeraldstreak]

Struggling with basic rules, are we

[The Random NPC]

Not really. At least in Pathfinder, where its relevant, you aren't required to cast any spells to make a magic item, just know them (or have a magic item with the spell on it).

In Pathfinder, you can totally make a magic item without ever having access to a spell, as long as it's not a spell completion item.