Rule Q: Akunal Background with Book Imp

[N0Man]

I just posted this on the Gleemax Living Forgotten Realms forum as well, but I thought I'd toss this out to you guys for more opinions.

Link to post:

I was considering making a new level 1 character with the Akunal Background and Book Imp (for Arcana and History), and happened to notice they shared fire resistance and was confused about how the bonuses stack.

Consider the following:

Akunal background: You gain resist 2 cold, resist 2 fire, and resist 2 thunder (or your existing resistance to these damages types increases by 2).

Book Imp familiar: You gain resist fire 5. If you already have resist fire, increase your resistance by 2.

What is your fire resist?

Since you are level 1, and you are taking these at the same time, which "already have" or "existing resistance" is first?

Does the background apply first for +2? If so, does that mean that that the Imp grants you +2 (since you already have resist) for a total of 4? If that's the case, then it means your background bonus is actually penalizing you 1 point.

Or does the Imp's apply first and give a +2 to the +5 imp resist for +7 total?

If it's the latter, Could DM's possibly intepret this differently and then make my background a disadvantage to me?

And finally, if it is the latter can I choose to ignore the bonus and just use the benefit of the imp instead?

 

[Flipguarder]

I would say the Akunal background works first, because its your background plain and simple.

And no the background doesn't "penalize your resistance by 1" It grants your primary resistance, and the book imp adds to it.

Your background is not a disadvantage to you, it increases your resistance to other things as well.

And really you can't argue saying:

"My bonuses should stack this way because otherwise getting both these options is an idiotic idea."

thats just illogical.

And no I wouldn't say you can use the book imp resistance instead. Although I believe its up to interpretation.

The book imp gives an additional +2 to current resistance for some valid reasons. I believe that one reason is precisely to stop a character from getting 7 resistance to a damage type at level 1.

Not saying I am absolutely right and can't be discussed with, I just think this is how it should logically work.

At the most I'd say if you can come up with a reason why you obtained your book imp before your Akunal background(I'm not exactly sure what KIND of background it is) then I could see letting you use the imp's stand alone bonus of 5 instead of the other total of 4.

 

[Diirk]

7 to a resist at 1st level isn't a big deal, you can do that with a tiefling or genasai anyway.

 

[Piratecat]

I'd err in favor of whichever option was most fun for the player and the game. Resist 7 isn't going to unbalance anything, particularly with a feat cost.

 

[Jabba Von Hutt]

First I want to state that I agree with the kitty above. However, strictly from a rules interpretation point of view.

1) Both grant a basic resistance ( 2 AK vs 5 Imp )

2) Both grant a +2 to an already existing resistance

3) Only 1, the AK basic cannot be removed or lost (although both could be suppressed). If you lose the imp you lose your bonus but you can't lose your background.

So based on that I would say that the Imp stacks on top of AK so 4. But at worst, to be completely fair if that's the way I'd rule it, I would say with the imp your resistance is 5.

Just checked in the character builder and it also showed a fire resist of 4.

 

[Dr_Ruminahui]

Which order did you choose the feats for character builder? My guess is that the program may simply be using the first feat entered as the original fire resistance, and I would therefore suggest also trying it twice: once entering the background first, the second entering the imp first.

 

[keterys]

I believe RAW is 4, but I'd let a player of mine have 5.

I don't believe that 7 makes sense, nor is adding it to items as you swap them in and out.

 

[Pyrex]

7 may not be RAW (which is probably 4), but it's what I'd rule. It seems clear that the intent is that they both provide resistance which is intended to stack, and since 2+5=4 is just plain dumb, 7 seems like the most reasonable option.

 

[keterys]

Both are intended to give resistance that stacks with your racial resistance, such as being a tiefling, it is true... but what makes you think that either is intended to stack with the other?

And really, the equation should be max(5,2+(max(P+2,2)) and it's a flaw in the imp that any way you get 1 or 2 resistance you end up getting less than someone else - that's a real flaw in the feat - but at no time is it _ever_ 2 + 5 as written.

 

[N0Man]

Both are intended to give resistance that stacks with your racial resistance, such as being a tiefling, it is true... but what makes you think that either is intended to stack with the other?

And really, the equation should be max(5,2+(max(P+2,2)) and it's a flaw in the imp that any way you get 1 or 2 resistance you end up getting less than someone else - that's a real flaw in the feat - but at no time is it _ever_ 2 + 5 as written.

How do you know for sure what is intended? It is possible to get resistance temporarily through powers and even permanent resistance through items at very low levels.

Also, I don't think it's a question of whether they do stack with one another, but how they stack. Both are written to specifically show that they are resists that stack with other resists (and they say 'from racial bonuses').

The more I think about it, the more I think that it should be +7. It's the only possible interpretation where both of the benefits are counted (which clearly are designed to stack with other benefits), and in which 1 benefit doesn't effectively make another benefit worse.