magic caused conditions stack?


Rules Questions


hi all,
fighting a daemon tonight and want to know if it's power.....

Consumptive Aura (su)

A meladaemon radiates an aura of hunger to a radius of 20 feet. Every round a creature begins its turn within this aura, it must succeed on a DC 22 Fortitude save or take 1d6 nonlethal damage and become fatigued from extreme hunger. Creatures that do not need to eat are immune to this effect. The save DC is Constitution-based.

will stack on two failed saves to make our front line fighters EXHAUSTED?

i know under natural conditions you could go from fatigued to exhausted

magic (su) stack?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Generally nothing stacks with itself except damage.


The damage would be cumulative, but the fatigue wouldn't progress further.

Unless your GM modifies the daemon/disapproves of metagaming - or does your PC have sufficient knowledge/you asked your GM in advance if you could look it up and seek forum help?

Silver Crusade

Spend 4000g for a Sustain without food and drink Ioun Stone...


Gilarius wrote:

The damage would be cumulative, but the fatigue wouldn't progress further.

Unless your GM modifies the daemon/disapproves of metagaming - or does your PC have sufficient knowledge/you asked your GM in advance if you could look it up and seek forum help?

no lol,

gm finished session with this thing coming towards party. know checks made high. gm said we could all read up and plan our tactics in this fight.


Gilarius wrote:
Unless your GM modifies the daemon/disapproves of metagaming - or does your PC have sufficient knowledge/you asked your GM in advance if you could look it up and seek forum help?

Is the OP a player in this game?

If so, not cool, not cool...

Well, I suppose maybe his character already knows what the fight will be and what the daemon's powers are, in which case, no harm, no foul. But if not, then definitely not cool.


DM_Blake wrote:
Gilarius wrote:
Unless your GM modifies the daemon/disapproves of metagaming - or does your PC have sufficient knowledge/you asked your GM in advance if you could look it up and seek forum help?

Is the OP a player in this game?

If so, not cool, not cool...

Well, I suppose maybe his character already knows what the fight will be and what the daemon's powers are, in which case, no harm, no foul. But if not, then definitely not cool.

well, i don't like it either but this is what the gm wants. A big boss fight with no escape. lots of info was found out about this boss during dungeon crawl. know checks in the thirties made once we see it and then.......gm ends the session. he wants us to use our knowledge to form tactics.

sry, got to play the hand the gm gives me

i agree it takes the fun out of it

Grand Lodge

The effect is instantaneous, rather than one that has a duration, so I don't see why it wouldn't stack.


Jeff Merola wrote:
The effect is instantaneous, rather than one that has a duration, so I don't see why it wouldn't stack.

The Fatigued condition begins as an instantaneous effect (in other words, it begins instantly rather than delayed), but the duration is the same as any time you're Fatigued - until you rest for 8 hours.


Unless specified otherwise, a creature that get hit with something that causes fatigue while fatigued becomes exhausted. Failing two saves against that daemon’s aura will exhaust a character.

It also has Waves of Fatigue. It could nail the party with that no-save spell first, then move in and let the aura do its work. Luckily, using the spell on characters affected by its aura will not cause exhaustion, because of the spell’s text.

Grand Lodge

DM_Blake wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:
The effect is instantaneous, rather than one that has a duration, so I don't see why it wouldn't stack.
The Fatigued condition begins as an instantaneous effect (in other words, it begins instantly rather than delayed), but the duration is the same as any time you're Fatigued - until you rest for 8 hours.

And Fatigue explicitly stacks with itself to move to Exhausted, its own duration doesn't matter. Magic Effects that are Instantaneous (usually) stack unless they say otherwise.

Also, "instantaneous" in this instance doesn't mean "takes effect immediately" it means the magic causes an effect, then ceases to exist. The aura just flat out makes you fatigued, rather than, say, fatigued for 1 minute per level (like Ray of Exhaustion).

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Jeff Merola wrote:
Magic Effects that are Instantaneous (usually) stack unless they say otherwise.

Book and Page reference for that rule?

Grand Lodge

James Risner wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:
Magic Effects that are Instantaneous (usually) stack unless they say otherwise.
Book and Page reference for that rule?

CRB, 209, part of the "Combining Magic Effects" section:

Quote:
Instantaneous Effects: Two or more spells with instantaneous durations work cumulatively when they affect the same target.


Wait, why are we saying that the Consumptive Aura is instantaneous? I don't see that in the description.

The aura lasts forever. It's always on. Permanent. The opposite of instantaneous.

The damage it does is instantaneous as is all damage so that's a no-brainer.

Fatigue is not instantaneous at all - you get hit with it, it lasts forever or until you rest 8 hours. That's pretty much the opposite of instantaneous too. And Fatigue has its own stacking rule anyway (exhaustion) so shouldn't we use that?

Grand Lodge

DM_Blake wrote:

Wait, why are we saying that the Consumptive Aura is instantaneous? I don't see that in the description.

The aura lasts forever. It's always on. Permanent. The opposite of instantaneous.

The damage it does is instantaneous as is all damage so that's a no-brainer.

Fatigue is not instantaneous at all - you get hit with it, it lasts forever or until you rest 8 hours. That's pretty much the opposite of instantaneous too. And Fatigue has its own stacking rule anyway (exhaustion) so shouldn't we use that?

It's instantaneous compared to something like Frightful Presence, which inflicts a condition with a duration of 5d6 rounds. And Fatigue stacks to Exhaustion anyway, so I'm not sure why you're saying it would stay as Fatigue.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Jeff Merola wrote:
It's instantaneous compared to something like Frightful Presence

It isn't instantaneous unless it says "Duration: Instantaneous". So your rules quote is completely irrelevant and the stacking rules explicitly forbid stacking of the aura's effect twice.


Jeff Merola wrote:
DM_Blake wrote:

Wait, why are we saying that the Consumptive Aura is instantaneous? I don't see that in the description.

The aura lasts forever. It's always on. Permanent. The opposite of instantaneous.

The damage it does is instantaneous as is all damage so that's a no-brainer.

Fatigue is not instantaneous at all - you get hit with it, it lasts forever or until you rest 8 hours. That's pretty much the opposite of instantaneous too. And Fatigue has its own stacking rule anyway (exhaustion) so shouldn't we use that?

It's instantaneous compared to something like Frightful Presence, which inflicts a condition with a duration of 5d6 rounds. And Fatigue stacks to Exhaustion anyway, so I'm not sure why you're saying it would stay as Fatigue.

There is nothing instantaneous about it. The aura is persistent and the Fatigue is persistent.

I didn't say it would "stay as Fatigue". Of course it will, if there is no reason to upgrade to Exhaustion and no reason to remove the condition. But clearly I said "Fatigue has its own stacking rule" that we should use if the victim gets hit with Consumptive Aura, or any other fatigue-causing ability, or if he simply stays up too late that night.

Grand Lodge

DM_Blake wrote:


There is nothing instantaneous about it. The aura is persistent and the Fatigue is persistent.

I didn't say it would "stay as Fatigue". Of course it will, if there is no reason to upgrade to Exhaustion and no reason to remove the condition. But clearly I said "Fatigue has its own stacking rule" that we should use if the victim gets hit with Consumptive Aura, or any other fatigue-causing ability, or if he simply stays up too late that night.

The only argument that was presented was that no, it wouldn't stack, so I assumed you were arguing that as well.


I would weigh in on the side of "would not stack".

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / magic caused conditions stack? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.