Post/Author/DateTime	Post
ksbsnowowl 08-15-07, 08:41 AM	Bestow Curse Necromancy Level: Clr 3, Sor/Wiz 4 Components: V, S Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Touch Target: Creature touched Duration: Permanent Saving Throw: Will negates Spell Resistance: Yes Can someone be affected by 2 bestow curse spells, one giving a -6 to one stat, and another giving -4 to all d20 rolls? I'm guessing that two spells could be cast on someone, but this would be a case of the most recent casting taking pecidence, and any earlier castings wouldn't come into play until the newest casting was removed through remove curse, etc. Correct?
runestar 08-15-07, 08:51 AM	I don't think anyone can give you a definitive answer. There was a thread sometime back about what stacked with what. My take was that bestow curse does not stack with itself, meaning that the 2nd casting effectively supercedes (and suppresses) the 1st bestow curse. I cannot be sure though.
Mindolin 08-15-07, 08:59 AM	The way I see it is that both curses work at the same time. The reason I see this is because they do not say they don't stack, and they do not accomplish the same thing.
ksbsnowowl 08-15-07, 09:39 AM	My take was that bestow curse does not stack with itself, meaning that the 2nd casting effectively supercedes (and suppresses) the 1st bestow curse. I cannot be sure though.After reading up on it further, I must agree with this.Same Effect with Differing Results The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts. This of course begs the question... what then happens if you have protection from energy cast on you covering two different elements?
bigbythewise 08-15-07, 10:11 AM	As runestar said, there isn't any definite word about this. The rule you've posted is confusing. Multiple Protection from Energy? I dunno. Personally, i would allow it because it's not game breaking at all. There are some abilities or spells that can grant you universal energy resistance as well as some items. Remember, that in older D&D versions, these "elemental" resist or immunity spells were separated, so now in 3.5 i can say that Resist Fire and Resist Cold spells stack. .)
runestar 08-15-07, 10:12 AM	This of course begs the question... what then happens if you have protection from energy cast on you covering two different elements? My answer would be the same as with bestow curse. This means that you cannot make yourself resistant to more than one element at any one time using protection from energy. Likewise, a sorc cannot cast immunity to elements 5 times at the start of each day to make himself immune to fire, cold, acid, electricity and sonic. Whether it is game-breaking to allow multiple castings to stack or not is another matter though.:)
bigbythewise 08-15-07, 10:29 AM	Likewise, a sorc cannot cast immunity to elements 5 times at the start of each day to make himself immune to fire, cold, acid, electricity and sonic. Why? Oh, you're finding it game-breaking aren't you? :) This would take five 7th level slots which is character level er? 15-16? All 7th level slots wasted for spells that can be easily dispelled. At level 21, you can craft Ring of Universal Energy Immunity which is permanent and can't be dispelled.
Bihlbo 08-15-07, 11:35 AM	Can someone be affected by 2 bestow curse spells, one giving a -6 to one stat, and another giving -4 to all d20 rolls? One possible take on this particular example: If you curse someone with -6 Dex, and then curse that target again with -4 to all d20 rolls, then at times they don't stack. For instance, a Hide check is a d20 roll. The -6 means the character takes a -3 penalty on the roll, but the curse that imposes a -4 penalty supersedes the other curse. Meaning, the Hide check has a -4, not a -7 penalty. Then again, it's arguable that the -6 Dex is the curse and the effective penalty is just a side affect (much like being slowed to half movement is a side affect of being blinded). The -4 to all rolls would stack with penalties that result from other sources. So, sorry I couldn't help.
runestar 08-15-07, 09:15 PM	Why? Oh, you're finding it game-breaking aren't you? Not necessarily. I was answering with regards to a literal reading of the rules as printed in the magic overview section. It is more a matter of whether you can, and not so much of whether you should be able to. It may be far from overpowering, and there might be nothing wrong with allowing it, but it is outside the purview of this current discussion.:)
Dheran 08-15-07, 11:37 PM	This of course begs the question... what then happens if you have protection from energy cast on you covering two different elements? Resist Energy/Protection from Energy with different energy types and Bestow Curse with different curses should be treated identically. They're the same spell producing different effects. How does Resist Energy work with multiple castings? Well, I can't see any way that it can't allow multiple simultaneous protections. Otherwise someone with Resist Acid 20 wading through an acid pool could have their useful protection wiped out by an enemy giving them Resist Cold 30. Yet this shouldn't be possible, because the spell description says:Resist Energy Saving Throw: Fortitude negates (harmless) Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)For Resist Energy to be a (harmless) spell it must be impossible for an enemy to wipe out a working protection by giving you a different one. If you look at the PH stacking prohibitions it refers to Polymorph as the same effect producing varying results. This spell is incapable of producing multiple different forms because each creature can only have one form at a time; Polymorph merely varies the form. A varying result (which has a stacking prohibition) is not the same as an entirely different effect from the same spell (for which the rules have no stacking prohibition). So Protection from Energy/Resist Energy (different energy types) and Bestow Curse (different curses) should stack just fine.
Nirid 08-15-07, 11:53 PM	Same Effect with Differing Results The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts. I don't know how litereral we want to be here. This is almost a question for an english major, but one could logically interpert that to mean something closer to the previous polymorph example. If somone polymorphs into a lion then casts polymorph again to turn into a dragon the first polymorph spell is trumped by second. The fact that he was a polymorphed lion has become irrelevant but the spell itself is still in effect. If someone were to dispell the second polymorph before the first ended without also dispelling the first we would get a lion. In the case of the curses stacking both effects would apply since neither makes the other "irrelevant".
Sildatorak 08-15-07, 11:59 PM	I'm in the camp that would let them stack. I think that the varying effects is talking more along the lines of the polymorph example than bestow curse. Also, if they don't stack, you can't give someone the sixfold mark of justice :)
Ananvil 08-16-07, 02:33 PM	One possible take on this particular example: If you curse someone with -6 Dex, and then curse that target again with -4 to all d20 rolls, then at times they don't stack. For instance, a Hide check is a d20 roll. The -6 means the character takes a -3 penalty on the roll, but the curse that imposes a -4 penalty supersedes the other curse. Meaning, the Hide check has a -4, not a -7 penalty. Then again, it's arguable that the -6 Dex is the curse and the effective penalty is just a side affect (much like being slowed to half movement is a side affect of being blinded). The -4 to all rolls would stack with penalties that result from other sources. So, sorry I couldn't help. I'd thing they would stack, as they apply differently. the -6 to dex lowers your Dex Mod. It has nothing to do with the -4 to all rolls. You'd effectively have a -7 to that hide roll, but it'd really be a -4, and your hide modifier would just be three lower. Obviously you couldn't layer -6 Con curses til something died, though.
mvincent 08-16-07, 02:40 PM	After reading up on it further, I must agree with this.This of course begs the question... what then happens if you have protection from energy cast on you covering two different elements?This has actually been discussed before (at length). It turns out that most of the original designers didn't really use the (oddly titled) "Same Effect with Differing Results" rule. They freely allowed PC's to have multiple, active protection from energy spells on themselves. The rule should probably be removed. Can anyone see an application for it that isn't covered by the other rules? Otherwise someone with Resist Acid 20 wading through an acid pool could have their useful protection wiped out by an enemy giving them Resist Cold 30.Heh. Itsa darn amusing idea.
bigbythewise 08-16-07, 04:51 PM	If you look at the [I]PH stacking prohibitions it refers to Polymorph as the same effect producing varying results. This spell is incapable of producing multiple different forms because each creature can only have one form at a time; Polymorph merely varies the form. A varying result (which has a stacking prohibition) is not the same as an entirely different effect from the same spell (for which the rules have no stacking prohibition). So Protection from Energy/Resist Energy (different energy types) and Bestow Curse (different curses) should stack just fine. I absolutely agree with you dude. There's even more in the books. Look up the Psionics Handbook, there's an example with Polymorph, Shadow Body and Metamorphosis which explains how they contradict with each other.
mvincent 08-16-07, 05:15 PM	If you look at the PH stacking prohibitions it refers to Polymorph as the same effect producing varying results. This spell is incapable of producing multiple different forms because each creature can only have one form at a time; Polymorph merely varies the form.This would seem to already be covered under the "One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant" rule. A varying result (which has a stacking prohibition) is not the same as an entirely different effect from the same spell (for which the rules have no stacking prohibition).Actually (despite the title) the rule (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/castingSpells.htm#stackingEffects) says "The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once.". So it does appear to address an entirely different effect from the same spell.
ReadError 08-20-07, 04:27 PM	In the game DDO (Dungeons&Dragons Online) based on Eberron, we can cast protection from energy with a different energy each time and they're all effective. I know that you will say that it's a video game and doesn't work like PnP, but this is the closest to PnP video game I've seen. I can't answer for bestow curse because in the game, the spell always gives the -4 to all rolls penalty.
bigbythewise 08-20-07, 04:40 PM	In the Neverwinter Nights 2 game, Energy Immunity spell worked with multiple energy types, but it was changed in the later updates to one active spell only. However, as well as the DDO, NWN2 mechanics doesn't solve anything regarding to this *PnP RAW* issue.
TiwazTyrsfist 08-20-07, 05:23 PM	I would allow different effects from seperate castings of the same spell to stack. For example. Two curses -6 Dex & -4 on d20 rolls. Fine. If a roll requires dex, the effect stacks, as the dex mod loss is a side effect, not the core effect, of the first curse. Likewise, two castings of protection from elements for different elements. Perfectly fine. My reasoning is this. Suppose they were seperate spells. Suppose that Protection from Fire, Protection from Cold, and Protection from Sonic were seperate spells. You would have no problem with them stacking. Suppose you had Curse of Clumsiness, and Curse of Weakness as seperate spells. You would have no problem with those stacking. Ergo, their should be no problem with different, seperate bonuses or penalties from multiple castings of a single spell stacking.
risner 08-20-07, 10:00 PM	I don't think anyone can give you a definitive answer. There was a thread sometime back about what stacked with what. My take was that bestow curse does not stack with itself, meaning that the 2nd casting effectively supercedes (and suppresses) the 1st bestow curse. I cannot be sure though. I agree with this interpretation, based on the "a spell can't stack with itself" rules. This question is heavily debated and there are contradictory rules depending on how you interpret each.
Tedronai 08-21-07, 12:09 AM	The rule being quoted in the reasoning to disallow this tactic says 'USUALLY' stacking does not occur in such situations. It then goes on to say that the effect of one spell becomes irrelevant while the other is active (which I interpret to be a clarification of why stacking would not occur). That is obviously not the case with the differing curses. A -6 dex penalty does not make a -4 penalty on all rolls irrelevant, nor vice versa. The rule is ambiguous and left up to interpretation, but it would seem clear to me that it was not intended to be interpreted in this way.
mvincent 08-21-07, 12:28 AM	The rule being quoted in the reasoning to disallow this tactic says 'USUALLY' stacking does not occur in such situations.Note: I'm not arguing for or against your (or any) stance, I'm just noting that if a rule says "usually", it is still up to the arguer to establish that a given situation is not part of the "usually". I do not believe such stacking can be established as an unusual outlier. it would seem clear to me that it was not intended to be interpreted in this way.How so? That does not seem truly clear in either direction. To me it seems like the author of that particular rule meant exactly what it said (and I'm unsure how to interpret the text any differently), but none of the other designers were thinking the same thing.