| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| Zanthorphs04-28-07, 04:03 PM | Hello again all, I have a conundrum facing me and my DM. It has to do with the Sword Sage (SS) class in ToB and the Monk class. Just to make it easier to understand I will break down the class layout so there is no confusion about how it happened. At first level I started with a Monk level then took four levels in SS. As I was making the sheet and reading over the SS class abilities I read that they also get to add their Wisdom Modifier to their AC, just like Monks, but they could do it while wearing Light armor. This got me to thinking that this could mean that it could stack with Monks Wis bonus, so I read on. To my surprise I was unable to find a sentence at the end saying, “This bonus does not stack with the bonus granted by the Monk class.” Leading me to freak out and wonder why they would put something like that in. So I brought this up with my DM and other player and it was a mixed result… he said (My DM) that it does not stack, even though it was not put in that it doesn’t. while almost everyone else agree that it does because it doesn’t say so, and it doesn’t seem logical that you would be unable to benefit from the bonus for being even lighter (ie- taking off the light armor). As an earlier example I stated that in the CA’s Ninja class it was clearly stated that Ninja can not double dip, but no such rule was thought up in, first off a book that has been recently released, the SS class. I agree and disagree with my DM on his decision to not allow this. He is correct because my AC would fairly high in comparison to my comrades, but I have to disagree with him on the fact that it is not in the rules and he can not give me a good reason besides he says so; I actually thought up the reason listed above, he just said he wouldn’t allow it. So I was wondering if he was correct in this decision or is someone actually allowed to double dip into both of these classes and get the bonus twice because after I brought this up with them it has been a major topic of debate there and elsewhere I would like an answer to this question. |
| Shan_TheBabau_Burke04-28-07, 04:09 PM | You only have one wisdom modifier, so you only apply it once. You're not twice as wise just because you multiclassed. It would be like doubling a fighter's strength if he decided to be a barbarian. It would be handy, but nonsensical. I would take it a step further and rule that some Monk skills weren't useful if you were in light armor because the whole point of a Monk is that he doesn't NEED armor and it would just get in the way. I would add the arcane spell failure chance to every attack made as well. It's a nice try, but there's no reason you should add your wisdom twice. |
| SD04-28-07, 08:42 PM | Monk lets you add Wis to AC. SS lets you add Wis to AC, but you already have it, so you don't get it again and you get nothing for lack of it. That's why bonus feats say things like "If you already have Mounted Combat, you may pick another feat for which you qualify", to help players who wouldn't get any benefit from the bonus feat. Wis to AC does not have this extra sentence, so you just lose a class feature, aw. Or to use another explanation: You do get Wis to AC twice! But they don't stack, they overlap, so it only factors into your AC once. |
| Seeker9504-28-07, 08:48 PM | Same named bonus (wisdom bonus to armor class) = no stacking. |
| Solaris04-28-07, 09:43 PM | A single bonus stacking with itself? Hilarious, the things players will try. |
| StoneStokes04-28-07, 09:55 PM | ...why shouldn't Dex bonus be applied for each class that you take? I have a bbn1/brd1/clr1/drd1/ftr1/mnk1/pal1/rgr1/sor1/wiz1 with Dex 18. He doesn't wear armor, carry a shield, or have any magic items, but his AC is 50. :rolleyes: |
| Nebo04-28-07, 10:01 PM | Same named bonus (wisdom bonus to armor class) = no stacking. The bonus is unnamed, it would apply if not for the fact that Swordsages get the bonus in light armour and monks get it in no armour. There's no overlap. The ToB FAQ says that the bonus is supposed to apply in no armour as well, but that's not official like errata. If you're going by the intent of the designers, as told by the FAQ, then yes, they do stack. |
| StoneStokes04-28-07, 10:13 PM | Nebo, can you point us to this ToB FAQ? |
| Zanthorphs04-29-07, 01:07 AM | While i may try an wiggle around all the rules to get something but i know when i am beaten and i just wanted to make sure. But yes i would also like to read this FAQ as well. |
| Seeker9504-29-07, 08:23 AM | The bonus is unnamedIt is named.AC Bonus (Ex) When unarmored and unencumbered, the monk adds her Wisdom bonus (if any) to her AC. It is named "wisdom bonus" |
| ArcTan04-29-07, 10:17 PM | I agree and disagree with my DM on his decision to not allow this. He is correct because my AC would fairly high in comparison to my comrades, but I have to disagree with him on the fact that it is not in the rules and he can not give me a good reason besides he says so; I actually thought up the reason listed above, he just said he wouldn’t allow it. "Your AC would be too high" is a fine reason. The general reason that this is a specific example of -- "It would make you too powerful" -- is a fine reason. A DM doesn't have to justify all his decisions based on existing rules. It's not like the existing rules are perfectly balanced anyway. |
| TheAnthroDM04-30-07, 02:21 AM | The bonus is called a Wisdom Modifier/Wisdom Bonus. It is therefore a named bonus that cannot by all logic stack with itself, as previously mentioned you don't get to add you Dex modifier for every class you take. Now assuming you pretend it's an unamed bonus: The wisdom bonus shows an alertness of the battlefield, so being lighter does not help you gain more perception. A counterpoint to this is, if it's only perception why does medium and heavy armor prevent it? Logically it wouldn't. Which is true, the only response to that is that medium and heavy armor is hard to move in, and just as you can't take full advantage of your dexterity in it, you can't take full advantage of your perception because you can't respond quick enough. I hope that helped. |
| TheAnthroDM04-30-07, 02:22 AM | "Your AC would be too high" is a fine reason. The general reason that this is a specific example of -- "It would make you too powerful" -- is a fine reason. A DM doesn't have to justify all his decisions based on existing rules. It's not like the existing rules are perfectly balanced anyway. Also, QFT |
| AZNsupermarket04-30-07, 03:06 PM | Q: Does the AC bonus of the swordsage (from Tome of Battle) stack with the AC bonus of the monk, even though they are both based on Wisdom modifier? A: No. The swordsage’s AC bonus, allowing the swordsage to apply her Wisdom bonus to her armor class, mimics the ability of the monk’s AC bonus. Since these abilities share the same name and have the same effect, they will not stack. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ask/20060904a |
| claypigeons04-30-07, 03:35 PM | ...why shouldn't Dex bonus be applied for each class that you take? I have a bbn1/brd1/clr1/drd1/ftr1/mnk1/pal1/rgr1/sor1/wiz1 with Dex 18. He doesn't wear armor, carry a shield, or have any magic items, but his AC is 50. Your dex bonus to AC isn't a class feature. It's a function of the combat system. There is a very important difference. It is named "wisdom bonus" It's named "AC Bonus". The effect is just that you get your wisdom bonus to AC. The thing people seem to be forgetting (or ignoring) is that the name of the ability is what matters. Not the effect... You only have one wisdom modifier, so you only apply it once. You're not twice as wise just because you multiclassed. Of course you aren't. But (while it doesn't work in this case), you might have learned a seperate set of 'skills' that let you apply what you know in combat in different ways. This is what lets the Invisible Blade's Unfettered Defense and the Duelist's Canny Defense abilies stack. |
| StoneStokes04-30-07, 04:42 PM | Your dex bonus to AC isn't a class feature. It's a function of the combat system. There is a very important difference. I was being sarcastic. |