Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="coyote6" data-source="post: 1029536" data-attributes="member: 1225">I dunno; I didn't think it was confusing, but I could've been wrong (I figured you would add the bonus to the penalty and use the sum as a modifier; in other words, a morale bonus counteracted a morale penalty). IMO, penalties and bonuses ought to use the same rules, and both use types when appropriate. What if there's a creature with a spell-like ability that &quot;functions as if it were the spell bane&quot;? Does it stack with an actual bane spell? The penalties are not technically from the same spell or ability; one's from a spell, one's from an ability that happens to function like the spell. So do they stack?If they had types, you'd know. Now, maybe they do, maybe they don't.The bonus type rules were created to reduce confusion as to what bonuses stacked; there's no reason they shouldn't apply to penalties, too.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="coyote6, post: 1029536, member: 1225"] I dunno; I didn't think it was confusing, but I could've been wrong (I figured you would add the bonus to the penalty and use the sum as a modifier; in other words, a morale bonus counteracted a morale penalty). IMO, penalties and bonuses ought to use the same rules, and both use types when appropriate. What if there's a creature with a spell-like ability that "functions as if it were the spell [i]bane[/i]"? Does it stack with an actual [i]bane[/i] spell? The penalties are not technically from the same spell or ability; one's from a spell, one's from an ability that happens to function like the spell. So do they stack? If they had types, you'd know. Now, maybe they do, maybe they don't. The bonus type rules were created to reduce confusion as to what bonuses stacked; there's no reason they shouldn't apply to penalties, too. [/QUOTE]

Verification