If you Run twice, do the -5 penalties stack?

[Mort_Q]

Being flanked while prone doesn't grant combat advantage twice, does it?

A double run isn't running faster, it's running for longer.

 

[Dr_Ruminahui]

Well, combat advantage is a bit different, as it is a condition - you either have it, or you don't.

Its like being dazed twice - the second daze doesn't do anything new to you.

That said, I'm in the "no stacking" club for the attack penalty for running.

 

[KarinsDad]

Sorry guys, but by RAW Draco is correct.

The penalties stack. Running is not a power, it's a move action. It does not use the Use A Power Action.

By RAI, it's pretty obvious that they do not stack. The reason for the penalty is the same, so it's really no different than if two powers applied the same penalty.

This has been erratted for Bonuses, but not for Penalties:

Some bonuses are untyped. Bonuses that have no type add together. However, if you gain multiple untyped bonuses from the same named game element (a power, a feat, a class feature, and the like), only the highest bonus applies, unless stated otherwise. For example, if you spend an action point and can see two warlords who have the Tactical Presence class feature, you gain the bonus to attack rolls from only one of the warlords, whichever one provides the higher bonus.

Note: PHB3 might have changed this, but I lost my PHB3. Not sure how I did that in less than 2 weeks. Someone could look that up.

 

[Kzach]

I certainly wouldn't stack them, regardless of RAW.

-5 to hit plus granting combat advantage and provoking wherever you move is such a massive penalty that players very rarely ever do it. There's simply no need to stack the penalties.

 

[Jhaelen]

Sorry guys, but by RAW Draco is correct.

Aren't we lucky then, that in D&D we have a DM who can overrule stupid RAW interpretations?

 

[KarinsDad]

Aren't we lucky then, that in D&D we have a DM who can overrule stupid RAW interpretations?

Yup. Course, the OP wasn't quite sure, so I guess not everyone can tell the difference between a stupid RAW interpretation and a valid RAW interpretation. Good thing Jhaelen is around to tell us the difference between the two.

 

[Piratecat]

Enough, guys.

On a separate note, I agree that's an interpretation I'll ignore.

 

[RigaMortus2]

Aren't we lucky then, that in D&D we have a DM who can overrule stupid RAW interpretations?

Well that is good for your own personal home game (which is probably how the majority of people play D&D), but on an offical organized level, such as RPGA, it is important to find out how one of those DMs would judge such a thing. Do they use RAW or something else? Generally RPGA has to be uniform in its decissions like these.

 

[Jhaelen]

Generally RPGA has to be uniform in its decissions like these.

Actually, nope. Luckily the RPGA has seen the light: In its latest incarnation DMs are pretty free to adjudicate the rules as they see fit. If you don't believe it, just read the intro of any of the RPGA modules.

For me this was one of the decisive reasons to finally join the RPGA. Finally, having fun is more important than strictly following the rules, as it should be, yay!

 

[Zinovia]

They shouldn't stack. It's the same penalty for the same action. I say pshaw to strict RAW interpretation.