Community

None of the RAW definitions of "bonus" I can find state that they must be explicitly labeled as such, just that they are "a number added to a dice roll" as such the statement "it does not say it is a bonus so it isn't" seems to be non-compliant with the "real rules". Of course it is very possible that the crux here is in the words "i can find"...  Oh and yes I should have checked the wording on bonus before writing my initial, wrong, reply

As for houserules and discussion on this forum. We are in total agreement on the fact that char-op deals only with the RAW (the realness of rules being a more subjective issue not meriting debate here ). However not all the people that ask questions here do so with the char-op base assumption (i.e. sushi and only sushi) in mind. In this case YES is the char-op answer and beyond char-op the answer is likely to be less certain and more situational. Mentioning that does not hurt char-op any imo, but I will attempt to stress the destinction more in future.

Sep 6, 2012 -- 12:57PM, Alcestis wrote:

Sep 6, 2012 -- 12:48PM, imaginaryfriend wrote:

None of the RAW definitions of "bonus" I can find state that they must be explicitly labeled as such, just that they are "a number added to a dice roll" as such the statement "it does not say it is a bonus so it isn't" seems to be non-compliant with the "real rules". Of course it is very possible that the crux here is in the words "i can find"... Oh and yes I should have checked the wording on bonus before writing my initial, wrong, reply

As for houserules and discussion on this forum. We are in total agreement on the fact that char-op deals only with the RAW (the realness of rules being a more subjective issue not meriting debate here ). However not all the people that ask questions here do so with the char-op base assumption (i.e. sushi and only sushi) in mind. In this case YES is the char-op answer and beyond char-op the answer is likely to be less certain and more situational. Mentioning that does not hurt char-op any imo, but I will attempt to stress the destinction more in future.

"Number added to a die roll" is the glossary definition in the RC. Unfortunately, you can have bonuses to things that aren't die rolls. Defenses, for one. So the definition is incomplete. Refer to the actual section of the book which deals with the rules for bonuses.

One of which is, in fact, that you can tell when a bonus is untyped because it says "+x bonus." 4e is very specific, if something isn't called a bonus, it isn't. If something isn't a push, pull or slide, it isn't forced movement. Etc.

I know it is the glossary definition, but its also the only definition.... All other references to bonus/bonusses are in an example format. Not a defining one. 

While it does indeed list "+2 bonus" as an example ( a for instance) of an untyped bonus (RC p28?), nowhere does it categorically (and/or literally) state bonuses are only bonuses when specifically labeled as such. 4e is indeed often very specific, but every now and then it really isn't. While I think its a supportable interpretation of the text, its still seems to be an interpretation.

I don't really know off the top of my head if it matters though. Don't think there is abundance of powers that fail to specify an addition as a bonus, that can additionally be optimized with. 

The bonus section defines bonus types, not the term bonus. And all I am reading is simply that there is no clearcut definition of the term bonus within the RAW that would translate to "it doesn't say it is a bonus, so it isn't". I am not opposed to that definition as I find it a perfectly reasonable translation/interpretation, but RAW it is not (to me). Anyway, think we are drifting way waaaay OT for this thread so I appologize for the deviation. Kinda par for the course/board, but still..back to the regularly scheduled cleric stuffs?

Sep 6, 2012 -- 2:31PM, Alcestis wrote:

Stipulative definition.

granted, but I would prefer precising 

From my reading of the rules radiant vessel does stack.  For the most part clerics won't need the extra healing by the time they have room for that feat in mid to late paragon.

I have played a couple of paragon and epic tier clerics and even without me trying that hard I had enough healing as the sole leader in a 5 person party.  My last battle cleric that I played to level 14 never even used Battle Resolve, the good daily healing utilty he got from paragon of victory.  

Radiant Vessel is a conditional extra healing that is super easy for a lot of clerics to trigger, but I think you are better off with one of the other feats that gives out a true bonus like shielding word or defensive word or something like mark of healing and there are better feats for people with a lot of radiant damage powers.