Does the fact that something is a "condition" have any mechanical effect?


Rules Questions


For example: "grappled" and "pinned" (from the grapple rules) are conditions (listed in the appendix under conditions), but "tied up" (also mentioned in the grapple rules) isn't a condition in itself - it merely "works like a pin effect".

Also, the tables for attack roll modifiers and damage roll modifiers list liberally mixes conditions (dazzled, entangled, ivisible, ...) and non-conditions (behind cover, concealed, squeezing).

Are there any mechanical effects that distinguish between conditions and non-conditions? (e.g. anything that can affect conditions but can't affect non-conditions)

Are "non-conditions" even a thing? Or would it be okay by RAW to call e.g. "squeezing" a condition, even though it isn't listed in the appendix?

Silver Crusade

I'm not sure if it really matters.

But as some people around here like to point out, the "dead" condition doesn't specifically say the creature can't take actions, so every corpse still gets a standard and move action every turn, by RAW.

Scarab Sages

Conditions tend to be continuous affects, the other modifiers tend to be more circumstance related, and would be applied on a round-by-round bases. The non-condition modifiers may or may not be applied to everyone.

An example is cover. A defender can have cover against one attacker, and no cover against another. This can change from round to round as the defender and attackers maneuver.

Mechanically: it makes no difference when modifying the die roll.


Conditions have standardized effects. It makes it easier to say something gives the Sickened condition, for example, than to have to repeat exactly what effects are applied every single time, which would take up a lot of page space.

The Exchange

I think what Jeraa is saying is that conditions are penalties (I suppose, in a few cases such as 'raging', they're bonuses, but that penalties that aren't conditions are still possible.

Way I see it, a 'condition' is a penalty (or bonus) that can come from a variety of different sources and still end up having the same game effects.

Such as death!


Thanks for the replies so far! There definitely are recurring characteristics among conditions, but there doesn't seem to be one simple definition that covers all of them:

Most conditions are penalties, but there are exceptions (e.g. incorporeal and invisible).

Most conditions are continous, but there are exceptions (e.g. prone - which should be the same type of thing as kneeling, sitting, or squeezing).

Many non-conditions are relative (e.g. flanking and higher ground), but there are exceptions (e.g. kneeling, sitting, or squeezing).

Conditions are standardized effects that can come from different sources, but so are some non-conditions (e.g. concealment).


Lincoln Hills wrote:
in a few cases such as 'raging', they're bonuses, but that penalties that aren't conditions are still possible.

Raging is a condition?

Where did you find that?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There are abilities that remove "conditions" specifically (example). These are generally limited to the conditions listed in the Core Rulebook. For example, exhausted is a condition, but concealment is not.

One could read the above example as providing a rather interesting version of speak with dead, I suppose....

The Exchange

Whoop! Okay, bad example. But non-penalty conditions do exist, so pretend I gave a very clever and apposite example instead. I won't mind.

Sovereign Court

blahpers wrote:

There are abilities that remove "conditions" specifically (example). These are generally limited to the conditions listed in the Core Rulebook. For example, exhausted is a condition, but concealment is not.

One could read the above example as providing a rather interesting version of speak with dead, I suppose....

Just... wow. Transferring the Dead condition to yourself, for just a moment. That's pretty cool. I wonder if any GM will let you get away with that.

Now the Binding Ties power says you can revert the condition to its owner as a Free Action, but can you actually take that action while you're dead? The Dead condition doesn't prohibit actions, but it does say that your soul leaves your body, so you're probably not in a position to make informed decisions about that. So you're probably riding out the duration of the power.

I wonder if the "dead since" date that the cleric uses continues from the previous subject, or if the cleric uses his own "dead since" clock. That might matter for Raise Dead potential.

Also important to note: while you're Being Dead for your ally, he's actually immune to the dead condition. There has to be some thing you can do with that.

Come to think of it: just because he's not dead (and not undead...), does that mean he's alive?

What kind of "no living being shall pass here" shenanigans could you engage in with this power?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Two additional interesting facts I stumbled upon during my research:

1. While there is indeed no rule that prohibits dead characters from taking actions, there is a rule that prohibits the players of dead characters to do so:

This isn't in the PRD, but if you have the actual CRB, it says this:

CRB, Gamemastering, Handling PC Death wrote:
When a PC dies, his player no longer has any input into the game [...]. That player has to sit at the table quietly, watching and waiting while everyone else continues to have fun with the game.

So, by RAW, players must sit still and are not even allowed to have fun while their charecters are dead (I need to start enforcing that rule at my table). Note that this doesn't apply to NPCs (so the GM could still make them act normally after they died) and that it isn't tied to the dead condition, but to the act of dying (so a player whose character gaining the dead condition via that family domain ability instead of by dying is still allowed to act and have fun - while the other player whose character doesn't have the dead condition anymore still hast to sit quietly without having fun. At least thats how I would rule it).

2. The Additional Rules chapter lists a few more "conditions":

"Hold portal" and "Arcane lock" are conditions that can be applied to objects (Just like with "broken", I assume objects unfortunately don't count as allies for the purpose that family domain ability)

"Favorable conditions" can double the weight one can push or drag (no examples given - by RAW I would have to assume that "favorable conditions" means invisible or incorporeal - and maybe prone while people are shooting at you).

Difficult terrain, obstacles, poor visibility, and impassable are conditions that hamper movement (probably conditions of the terrain, not of the character).

The Exchange

Well-researched, Friendly Lich! I do love to see the places that true devotion to the Sacred Text can take us.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Does the fact that something is a "condition" have any mechanical effect? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.