Do penalties stack with bonuses?

[0-hr]

My naked AC is 15. I am wearing a ring of protection +1 (which grants a +1 deflection bonus to AC) and I have a shield guardian protecting me (which causes a -2 deflection penalty to all attacks directed at me). If the orc attacking me has a +5 to hit normally, what does he need to roll in order to hit me now?


It would be clear if the guardian just gave me a +2 deflection bonus to AC. But by giving everyone else a penalty instead, it has me confused.

Is my net gain 2 points of deflection, or 3? (My guess is that my AC goes up by 1 and all the d20 die rolls against me go down by 2.)

 

[hong]

Since the penalty applies to attack rolls directed against you, its effect is cumulative with your own ring of protection. Stacking technically doesn't come into it, since the modifiers apply to different numbers.

Think of how firing into melee gives a -4 penalty to attack rolls, and being behind someone gives you a +4 cover bonus to AC. Someone trying to hit a target in melee who is behind another combatant is effectively at -8 to hit, because the modifiers are cumulative.

 

[dkilgo]

What hong said!

 

[Zulkir of Dartmouth]

Since the penalty applies to attack rolls directed against you, its effect is cumulative with your own ring of protection. Stacking technically doesn't come into it, since the modifiers apply to different numbers.

Think of how firing into melee gives a -4 penalty to attack rolls, and being behind someone gives you a +4 cover bonus to AC. Someone trying to hit a target in melee who is behind another combatant is effectively at -8 to hit, because the modifiers are cumulative.

Sorry to go against the grain here. But I would have to point out that on (p176 DMG) it states:

"Different named bonus types all stack, but usually a named bonus does not stack with another bonus of the same name (EXCEPT for enhancement bonuses to armor and shields, enhancement bonuses to ranged weapons and their ammunition, dodge bonuses, synergy bonuses, and some circumstance bonuses.)

If their were another exception to the RULE in the DMG don't you think it would have been listed as an exception in the description on the shield guardian? It is not, so even though you have two things giving you a deflection bonus, you would only get the +2 from the shield guardian.

 

[Number47]

Read the post again. The shield guardian does NOT provide a boost to AC. It provides a "deflection penalty" to incoming attacks. Hence, it stacks because it doesn't need to stack.

 

[dkilgo]

Sorry to go against the grain here. But I would have to point out that on (p176 DMG) it states:

"Different named bonus types all stack, but usually a named bonus does not stack with another bonus of the same name (EXCEPT for enhancement bonuses to armor and shields, enhancement bonuses to ranged weapons and their ammunition, dodge bonuses, synergy bonuses, and some circumstance bonuses.)



If their were another exception to the RULE in the DMG don't you think it would have been listed as an exception in the description on the shield guardian? It is not, so even though you have two things giving you a deflection bonus, you would only get the +2 from the shield guardian.

Well, if they were to write every description to its fullest then the books would be so thick that the printing costs for them would be extraordinaryly high. Hence, we would be buying the books in parts like: Part I of the DMG, Part II of the DMG, etc.

They left it open for a little bit of interpretation.

 

[Zulkir of Dartmouth]

Yeah, sorry about that I did read that wrong.

So with that said.

(My guess is that my AC goes up by 1 and all the d20 die rolls against me go down by 2.)

That sounds good to me Ki Ryn.

 

[Veldrane]

even though you have two things giving you a deflection bonus

That's not the case.. ..he hasn't two things giving him a deflection bonus. The ring gives him a +1 deflection bonus to AC, while the guardian cause a -2 Deflection penalty to all attacks directed at him. This, indirectly, makes him harder to hit, but this is not by far the same type of bonus applied to the same statistic.
First, one is a bonus, the other is a penalty. Second, and more important, they're not applying to the same check/stat.. ..one applies to the defender's AC, the other to the attacker's to hit roll.. ..If you're saying they're the same thing, I'd be very curious to know how do you handle things like "Attacker: +1 Morale bonus to attacks" with "Defender: -2 Morale penalty to AC", things that don't always happen, but surely can... ...do you really use only one or the other just because there's a Morale modifier to both the statistics that interacts with each other?

[Edit]
OMG, three minutes too late

I leave the argument just in case of further discussion..
[/Edit]

 

[dkilgo]

Now everybody can dance merrily, and join in on the festivities!

Much drinking, singing, and playing many FR campaigns.

hee hee hee hee hee hee

 

[Stalker0]

To add some quotes to this debate, in Monte Cook's Book of Hallowed Might (which I just got there's a spell called Redemptive Redress. Basically, if you have a -6 moral penalty for a curse, it gives you a +6 moral bonus for a time to specifically counter it. Monte at least thinks they stack.