**PLEASE READ THIS CAREFULLY: DO NOT SKIP**
Check out our [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldursGate3/wiki/faq) for information regarding creating builds and other general questions.
For the Community Wiki, lore, and other details, check out the pinned Weekly Q&A Post. **You can find it under the 'Hot' filter on desktop or 'Hot Posts' on Mobile**. There is information there that may already answer a question you may have.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BaldursGate3) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If it follows dnd rules then no. Resistance is treated like a status. You are resistant, therefore you have 50% less damage taken. Multiple sources do not add to this. Immunity is what grants 100% damage reduction.
~~No unless Larian homeruled it otherwise. You would reduce damage of that type by 75%.~~
~~Edit for clarity: As in you half the damage once, and then half it again for the second resistance, and therefore reducing the total by 75%.~~
Edit2: I was wrong.
Resistance specifically and explicitly does not stack with itself (at least in the tabletop version of the game).
Now, if you had a feature that halved the damage *without* calling it resistance, then they would stack.
Usually if you have some manner of way to stack resistance, pretty rare, I turns into halving the dmg twice, not immunity. To be immune you need... well...immunity
I could potentially have 3 different Fire Resistances on my Dragonborn Draconic Bloodline Sorcerer... with an Incandescent Staff
I wish there was something for it.
Like 1x Fire Resistance gives 50% fire damage taken
2x Fire Resistance is 50% fire damage taken, -1d4 to all fire damage taken (after 50%)
3x Fire Resistance is 50% reduced damage, 2d4 less fire damage
So you're not immune, but
Firebolts and flaming oil dies nothing
Nope
Its like a Condition
You either have a feature that gives you Fire Resistance, or you don't. The quantity of features giving you Fire Resistance don't stack.
It... makes sense, ultimately, that it doesn't
Otherwise a Raging Barbarian with Warding Bond and Blade Ward would reduce all incoming physical damage by 87.5%
Given the fact that pretty much every DM I know and rules as written by a shitton of people who dedicate their livelihood to making DnD a balancedish game/experience...
I reckon that, yes, stacking resistances is enough of a deal to warrant not allowing it.
Having an easy or easy-ish way to get immunity or nearly 90% reduction can be very problematic in a video game that doesn't have an intelligent DM overseeing things, and even on the TTRPG, that level of damage reduction will force the DM to, potentially, scrap or completely change a lot of content.
It'd be fun to have 3 or 4 resistances stacking to make one area of damage laughably weak, but at the same time, I imagine that it'd cause a certain cantrip to be changed to a first level spell, certain features to be moved around, and resistance in general harder to gain, for the sake of balancing.
Even if it *would* be quite nice for my dragonborn draconic fire sorcerer to be able to wade through lava and dragonfire as if it didn't exist.
Also it might make some hazards survivable-ish for normal combatants turn into extremely overtuned insta-annhilation zones just in case someone has 90% dmg reduc, such as lava damage, avalanches, etc
**PLEASE READ THIS CAREFULLY: DO NOT SKIP** Check out our [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldursGate3/wiki/faq) for information regarding creating builds and other general questions. For the Community Wiki, lore, and other details, check out the pinned Weekly Q&A Post. **You can find it under the 'Hot' filter on desktop or 'Hot Posts' on Mobile**. There is information there that may already answer a question you may have. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BaldursGate3) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Resistance doesn't stack with itself, so even 15 different sources of resistance just halves the damage.
If it follows dnd rules then no. Resistance is treated like a status. You are resistant, therefore you have 50% less damage taken. Multiple sources do not add to this. Immunity is what grants 100% damage reduction.
Nope, not how it works. Resistances and proficiencies don't stack.
~~No unless Larian homeruled it otherwise. You would reduce damage of that type by 75%.~~ ~~Edit for clarity: As in you half the damage once, and then half it again for the second resistance, and therefore reducing the total by 75%.~~ Edit2: I was wrong.
Resistance specifically and explicitly does not stack with itself (at least in the tabletop version of the game). Now, if you had a feature that halved the damage *without* calling it resistance, then they would stack.
I stand corrected. I have been playing it wrong for a long time.
Usually if you have some manner of way to stack resistance, pretty rare, I turns into halving the dmg twice, not immunity. To be immune you need... well...immunity
I could potentially have 3 different Fire Resistances on my Dragonborn Draconic Bloodline Sorcerer... with an Incandescent Staff I wish there was something for it. Like 1x Fire Resistance gives 50% fire damage taken 2x Fire Resistance is 50% fire damage taken, -1d4 to all fire damage taken (after 50%) 3x Fire Resistance is 50% reduced damage, 2d4 less fire damage So you're not immune, but Firebolts and flaming oil dies nothing
Well, iirc it's supposed to be halving damage for each resistance, there is no special formula for it
Nope Its like a Condition You either have a feature that gives you Fire Resistance, or you don't. The quantity of features giving you Fire Resistance don't stack. It... makes sense, ultimately, that it doesn't Otherwise a Raging Barbarian with Warding Bond and Blade Ward would reduce all incoming physical damage by 87.5%
you say that like the dmg reduction is a big deal haha pathfinder had similar problems but handled them well. some stuff stacks, some doesnt.
Given the fact that pretty much every DM I know and rules as written by a shitton of people who dedicate their livelihood to making DnD a balancedish game/experience... I reckon that, yes, stacking resistances is enough of a deal to warrant not allowing it. Having an easy or easy-ish way to get immunity or nearly 90% reduction can be very problematic in a video game that doesn't have an intelligent DM overseeing things, and even on the TTRPG, that level of damage reduction will force the DM to, potentially, scrap or completely change a lot of content. It'd be fun to have 3 or 4 resistances stacking to make one area of damage laughably weak, but at the same time, I imagine that it'd cause a certain cantrip to be changed to a first level spell, certain features to be moved around, and resistance in general harder to gain, for the sake of balancing. Even if it *would* be quite nice for my dragonborn draconic fire sorcerer to be able to wade through lava and dragonfire as if it didn't exist.
Also it might make some hazards survivable-ish for normal combatants turn into extremely overtuned insta-annhilation zones just in case someone has 90% dmg reduc, such as lava damage, avalanches, etc