D&D 5E Dungeon Master Guide errata clarification?

AbhorrentLesson · Dec 25, 2015

So this is a question regarding the errata entitled "Chapter 8 Combining Game Effects (p. 252)". This states: This is a new subsection at the end of the “Combat” section: “Different game features can affect a target at the same time. But when two or more game features have the same name, only the effects of one of them—the most potent one—apply while the durations of the effects overlap. For example, if a target is ignited by a fire elemental’s Fire Form trait, the ongoing fire damage doesn’t increase if the burning target is subjected to that trait again. Game features include spells, class features, feats, racial traits, monster abilities, and magic items. See the related rule in the ‘Combining Magical Effects’ section of chapter 10 in the Player’s Handbook.” My current understanding is that going off the example, a consecutive use of Fire Form doesn't increase damage to the target because of the fact that it's an instance of a trait with the same name affecting a target twice, not because it's an instance of two fire damages being inflicted? However, this would still increase the duration of the fire damage as the duration's of the two Fire Forms combine together? I take it this doesn't apply to things like Armor Class, but if it did, it'd work where things that grant points towards Armor Class would only be affected by this rule if they were from the same source, not because of the fact they both give points towards Armor Class? I guess some of the confusion arose from the specification that if two game features had the same name only the effects of the most potent one would apply, as I'm not sure of a situation where a creature could have a game feature with the same name with differing potency. Perhaps they were accounting for if two creatures, a stronger one and a weaker one, used the same feature on a target since then there would be a differing potency? Could someone give me an example of exactly how durations would overlap as well? I feel like Fire Form was a slightly odd example to use, as the duration for it is as long as the fire elemental is standing by a creature. Anyways, I could have two attack and damage roll boosting magical items that both grant a bonus of +5 to each, which would apply together to make +10 as long as said items are different?

UngeheuerLich · Dec 25, 2015

Paladin aura. Charisma bonus to all saving throws. By RAW it did stack when more than one paladin was present because in the PHB the stacking rule applies only to spell effects.
Now if one paladin has 16 cha and the other one only 14 you get a +3 bonus to saves instead of a +5 bonus... which should have been the rule to begin with.

Jester David · Dec 25, 2015

It's basically saying that you can't stack the same effect. So if a couple ghouls hits you with a paralyze blow, you just have to save once against being paralyzed not each potential instance. You can't stunlock someone with overlapping conditions. In this instance, the durations would overlap (and not add together), and one might expire while another instance (with a longer duration) might continue.

It also means you can't gain the same buff spell twice (two instances of bless for example)

AbhorrentLesson · Dec 25, 2015

So for overlapping, that basically means that if two uses of the same trait/spell/ability/etc. that inflicts the same condition for a varying amount of time is handled like this: Trait upon successful use inflicts target with poison damage for 1d4 turns, and two monsters with that same trait use it against a target. The results are one monster inflicting it for 2 turns, and the other for 4 turns, with a turn for the target in between the inflictions of the two monsters. Instead of adding the 1 + 4 for a total of 5 turns (I'm getting 5 there since the second monster inflicted its poison at a point where the target already suffered the other monsters poison damage for a turn), it would only be 4? Besides that the confusion for me is still that the term "effects" appears oddly used. It seems that the way this errata is written, the word "effects" refers to racial traits, spells, class features, feats, racial traits, monster abilities, and magic items, not what each of them actually causes (like status conditions, types of damage, bonuses, etc). Specifically going off Jester's example: As long as I had two different sources for something that inflicts say paralysis, the rule would in fact not apply, and you'd have to save multiple times instead of just once for the same condition being inflicted. I feel the sentence that says "if a target is ignited by a fire elemental’s Fire Form trait, the ongoing fire damage doesn’t increase if the burning target is subjected to that trait again" with the emphasis on the word "trait" near the end supports this. This would mean that if two different traits did the exact same thing, they would both increase the damage (as opposed to only the most potent one being in affect) and durations overlap as well, as in the PHB the section "Combining Magical Effects" seems to make it clear there is never an instance where durations of anything add together. Thoughts?

Sword of Spirit · Dec 28, 2015

AbhorrentLesson said:
This would mean that if two different traits did the exact same thing, they would both increase the damage (as opposed to only the most potent one being in affect)

No, you'd only take damage from one of them. If for some reason they caused different amounts of damage (such as one of the creatures being a more powerful version of the other--the MM has some like that), you'd take the highest.

Other than that one point, in reading your posts it looks to me like you are correctly interpreting everything. So what else would you like to know?

AbhorrentLesson · Dec 28, 2015

Thanks for the reply! Well I guess that's what I seem to be stuck on then haha. The way I'm reading the errata, it seems like its intent is to stop the exact same spell/class feature/feat/racial trait/monster ability/magic item from being used multiple times simultaneously, rather than the same status effect, bonus, or penalty being used. The reason I'm seeing it this way, is because the example chose to specify that after being inflicted with damage from the Fire Form trait "the ongoing fire damage doesn’t increase if the burning target is subjected to that trait again", rather than saying "the ongoing fire damage doesn’t increase if the burning target is subjected to additional fire damage from a different source". That is why it's confusing to me, from that example one would think that it's really the instance of a racial trait being used twice that makes the fire damage not increase. So I'd think that based on that, and though I'm pretty sure there is never a case of this in any official source for 5e, I'd think that if two completely different sources did the exact same thing (down to the very number of whatever it did), this rule wouldn't apply as they are from different sources (and the emphasis for this rule seems to be on the source, not really what the source does). Like for Armor Class, I can wear a set of armor which grants an AC bonus, and a shield which grants an AC bonus as well, but if I wear a second set of armor, or a shield, it has no effect. The focus isn't on the fact they both grant AC bonuses (if so, I wouldn't even be able to wear both a shield and a set of armor in the first place). In another made up instance: An item called "The ring of valor" adds +3 to attack and damage rolls, while an item called "The top hat of Ares" adds +4 to attack and damage rolls. They are from different sources, so even though they give the same kind of bonus, wouldn't it add to +7 to attack and damage rolls, rather than just +4 (the higher bonus)? Wouldn't the situation only be applicable to the rule if one was to try and equip two "the top hat of Ares" items, where one is common and one is rarer, so the one with the higher bonus would be the only one in effect?

Jeff Carlsen · Dec 28, 2015

You are correct. Two similar effects stack so long as they don't come from two sources with the same name. In your example, the ring of valor +3 and the top hat of Ares +4 stack for a total of +7. If you then put a ring of valor +5 on a different finger, it would override the weaker version, so your total would be +9.

Duration works like this: Say you are hit by acid spit, taking 5 damage each round for four rounds. Two rounds later, you get hit with another acid spit, taking 3 damage for two rounds. And finally, two rounds after that, you are hit with an Acid Rain spell, taking 7 damage for two rounds.

You would take 5 damage for the first two rounds, as there is only one effect. For the next two rounds, you are affected be two instances of acid spit, but they don't stack. Thus you still only take 5 damage per round, not 8. Then the first instance wears off, but you still have two rounds of the second instance, taking 3 damage per round. You are also being affected by the Acid Rain, which has a different name, and thus stacks. So, for the next two rounds you take a total of 10 acid damage.

Sword of Spirit · Dec 28, 2015

AbhorrentLesson said:
Thanks for the reply! Well I guess that's what I seem to be stuck on then haha. The way I'm reading the errata, it seems like its intent is to stop the exact same spell/class feature/feat/racial trait/monster ability/magic item from being used multiple times simultaneously, rather than the same status effect, bonus, or penalty being used. The reason I'm seeing it this way, is because the example chose to specify that after being inflicted with damage from the Fire Form trait "the ongoing fire damage doesn’t increase if the burning target is subjected to that trait again", rather than saying "the ongoing fire damage doesn’t increase if the burning target is subjected to additional fire damage from a different source". That is why it's confusing to me, from that example one would think that it's really the instance of a racial trait being used twice that makes the fire damage not increase. So I'd think that based on that, and though I'm pretty sure there is never a case of this in any official source for 5e, I'd think that if two completely different sources did the exact same thing (down to the very number of whatever it did), this rule wouldn't apply as they are from different sources (and the emphasis for this rule seems to be on the source, not really what the source does). Like for Armor Class, I can wear a set of armor which grants an AC bonus, and a shield which grants an AC bonus as well, but if I wear a second set of armor, or a shield, it has no effect. The focus isn't on the fact they both grant AC bonuses (if so, I wouldn't even be able to wear both a shield and a set of armor in the first place). In another made up instance: An item called "The ring of valor" adds +3 to attack and damage rolls, while an item called "The top hat of Ares" adds +4 to attack and damage rolls. They are from different sources, so even though they give the same kind of bonus, wouldn't it add to +7 to attack and damage rolls, rather than just +4 (the higher bonus)? Wouldn't the situation only be applicable to the rule if one was to try and equip two "the top hat of Ares" items, where one is common and one is rarer, so the one with the higher bonus would be the only one in effect?

Yes, that's exactly how it is intended to work.

Li Shenron · Dec 28, 2015

Jester Canuck said:
So if a couple ghouls hits you with a paralyze blow, you just have to save once against being paralyzed not each potential instance.

I think this is a bit confusing example... It makes it sound so that if you make the initial save for one ghoul's paralysis, you don't need to roll a save again against another ghoul's paralysis.

I think you meant to say that if you failed the initial save against two ghouls' paralysis (and so you are paralyzed), being paralyzed "twice" is the same as being paralyzed "once", and so only one further save each round is needed to get free.

AbhorrentLesson · Dec 28, 2015

Oh yes, thank you for clarifying that Li Shenron, and thank you guys! You really helped me out immensely. Jeff Carlsen, that was a really good example for me, and you even explained what happens when a weaker version of an effect lasts longer than the stronger one, I really appreciate it!

D&D 5E Dungeon Master Guide errata clarification?

AbhorrentLesson

First Post

UngeheuerLich

Legend

Jester David

Hero

AbhorrentLesson

First Post

Sword of Spirit

Legend

AbhorrentLesson

First Post

Jeff Carlsen

Adventurer

Sword of Spirit

Legend

Li Shenron

Legend

AbhorrentLesson

First Post

Similar Threads