
Roco |
So, recently there was a debate on how Unshakable Chill (the spell) and "Severe Cold" rules work.
From my understanding, when you suffer Sever Cold conditions, you are fatigued and like fatigue rules, you may suffer exhaustion if you get hit with a fatigue causing source again.
So, basically, Unshakable Chill + another Unshakable Chill / Touch of fatigue should cause exhaustion that won't go away till they heal their non-lethal damage/get enough rest.
My fellows seem to think because it says "A character who takes any nonlethal damage from cold or exposure is beset by frostbite or hypothermia (treat her as fatigued). These penalties end when the character recovers the nonlethal damage she took from the cold and exposure.
specifically the bold part there, that you only count the fatigue penalties, not the condition itself and its ability to upgrade to exhaustion.
Is this true? How the heck does severe cold work with relation to Unshakable Chill?
If indeed it only gives the penalty and not the condition of fatigue, then I can't think of ANY use for Unshakable Chill.

Letric |

So, recently there was a debate on how Unshakable Chill (the spell) and "Severe Cold" rules work.
From my understanding, when you suffer Sever Cold conditions, you are fatigued and like fatigue rules, you may suffer exhaustion if you get hit with a fatigue causing source again.
So, basically, Unshakable Chill + another Unshakable Chill / Touch of fatigue should cause exhaustion that won't go away till they heal their non-lethal damage/get enough rest.
My fellows seem to think because it says "A character who takes any nonlethal damage from cold or exposure is beset by frostbite or hypothermia (treat her as fatigued). These penalties end when the character recovers the nonlethal damage she took from the cold and exposure.
specifically the bold part there, that you only count the fatigue penalties, not the condition itself and its ability to upgrade to exhaustion.
Is this true? How the heck does severe cold work with relation to Unshakable Chill?
If indeed it only gives the penalty and not the condition of fatigue, then I can't think of ANY use for Unshakable Chill.
I'm not native english speaker.
The character is NOT fatigued, but treated as:
A character who takes any nonlethal damage from cold or exposure is beset by frostbite or hypothermia (treat her as fatigued).
Is it the same?

Roco |
Roco wrote:So, recently there was a debate on how Unshakable Chill (the spell) and "Severe Cold" rules work.
From my understanding, when you suffer Sever Cold conditions, you are fatigued and like fatigue rules, you may suffer exhaustion if you get hit with a fatigue causing source again.
So, basically, Unshakable Chill + another Unshakable Chill / Touch of fatigue should cause exhaustion that won't go away till they heal their non-lethal damage/get enough rest.
My fellows seem to think because it says "A character who takes any nonlethal damage from cold or exposure is beset by frostbite or hypothermia (treat her as fatigued). These penalties end when the character recovers the nonlethal damage she took from the cold and exposure.
specifically the bold part there, that you only count the fatigue penalties, not the condition itself and its ability to upgrade to exhaustion.
Is this true? How the heck does severe cold work with relation to Unshakable Chill?
If indeed it only gives the penalty and not the condition of fatigue, then I can't think of ANY use for Unshakable Chill.
I'm not native english speaker.
The character is NOT fatigued, but treated as:
A character who takes any nonlethal damage from cold or exposure is beset by frostbite or hypothermia (treat her as fatigued).
Is it the same?
That is the debate between my friends.
Does the wording "Treat her as fatigued" mean that it is fatigue and thus can go into Exhaustion? (logically speaking, one would assume yes, because certainly you get exponentially tired the more you dredge through cold weather)
But Pathfinder isn't always logical.
I pointed out that if you make "Treat as X" descriptors NOT follow all the rules FOR that descriptor there can be some problems with other abilities and spells.
One example was Aether kineticist's ability:
Telekinetic Invisibility.
"You weave strands of aether, bending light and dampening sound; This works as invisibility except that the aetheric bending is easier to notice than normal invisibility, so your bonus on Stealth checks is halved (+10 while moving and +20 while perfectly still).
However, the dampened sound allows you to avoid automatic detection via sound-based blindsense and blindsight, but you do not receive the bonus on Stealth checks from this wild talent against a creature with such abilities."
"This works as invisibility" is the same as "Treat as Invisibility"
Assuming the definition of "treat as" and "works as" are the same.If you rule that "Treat as fatigue" does not follow the rules of fatigue, and some how some bits work (mostly the stats) and some bits don't (the other effects, like upgrading into exhaustion), then likewise the Aether Kineticist would actually be QUITE visible... but still getting a stealth bonus. Because being completely unseen is the condition "Invisible". Likewise, since it's not ACTUALLY invisible, things like "see invisibility" would not work, as it's not technically invisible.

blahpers |

If it doesn't progress to exhaustion upon gaining fatigued again, then you aren't really treating the character as fatigued.
The character is fatigued. If they are fatigued again by some other effect, they are exhausted. If they heal the nonlethal damage, they are no longer fatigued from severe cold; if they were exhausted because of it and some other fatigue effect, they would be fatigued instead.
(Amusingly, extreme cold doesn't fatigue you at all. *shrug*)

Roco |
If it doesn't progress to exhaustion upon gaining fatigued again, then you aren't really treating the character as fatigued.
The character is fatigued. If they are fatigued again by some other effect, they are exhausted. If they heal the nonlethal damage, they are no longer fatigued from severe cold; if they were exhausted because of it and some other fatigue effect, they would be fatigued instead.
(Amusingly, extreme cold doesn't fatigue you at all. *shrug*)
When you say "some other fatigue effect" do you mean severe cold's ticking save affect doesn't trigger fatigue again?
I'd assume if you failed your save twice and haven't recovered the damage then you'll be exhausted. But, unlike normal fatigue, you can warm up and heal your non-lethal damage to get rid of the fatigue and exauhstion

Roco |
If it doesn't progress to exhaustion upon gaining fatigued again, then you aren't really treating the character as fatigued.
Oh,also, at what point is this kind of fatigue not counted as fatigue ?
By that I mean, are there abilities or descriptors that check for the "fatigue " status and since this is hypothermia that is being treated "as fatigue" would this kind of fatigue trigger those other effects?

Roco |
Barbarians cannot Rage whilst Fatigued... so that particular class feature "looks" if the Fatigued condition is present.
So in that vain, would Severe Cold, causing Hypothermia, which is like fatigue, make barbarian unable to rage?
Or, does the fact that it's not precisely labeled as Fatigue prevent this?

VoodistMonk |

When I read the severe cold rules:
A character who takes any nonlethal damage from cold or exposure is beset by frostbite or hypothermia (treat her as fatigued). These penalties end when the character recovers the nonlethal damage she took from the cold and exposure.
I read it as "she IS Fatigued"... and here's why...
Frostbite and hypothermia are not defined conditions in Pathfinder, Fatigue is. That simple. Done.
If a character tried to argue it at my table, I would 100% pull the "because the GM said so" card, and we would move on.
But I have frostbite, the book says to treat it AS Fatigue, not that it IS Fatigue...
And I'm the GM, and I am treating your frostbite as I treat the Fatigued condition, the book also explains what that is... you are Fatigued, deal with it.
I wouldn't waste another second listening to arguments about frostbite and hypothermia when the only reference to either of those conditions points you directly to the Fatigued condition.
Fail a save, take nonlethal damage from the cold? Fatigued. It sucks to be cold, and that's a fact.
Even Paizo got that much right.

Roco |
When I read the severe cold rules:
A character who takes any nonlethal damage from cold or exposure is beset by frostbite or hypothermia (treat her as fatigued). These penalties end when the character recovers the nonlethal damage she took from the cold and exposure.
I read it as "she IS Fatigued"... and here's why...
Frostbite and hypothermia are not defined conditions in Pathfinder, Fatigue is. That simple. Done.
If a character tried to argue it at my table, I would 100% pull the "because the GM said so" card, and we would move on.
But I have frostbite, the book says to treat it AS Fatigue, not that it IS Fatigue...
And I'm the GM, and I am treating your frostbite as I treat the Fatigued condition, the book also explains what that is... you are Fatigued, deal with it.
I wouldn't waste another second listening to arguments about frostbite and hypothermia when the only reference to either of those conditions points you directly to the Fatigued condition.
Fail a save, take nonlethal damage from the cold? Fatigued. It sucks to be cold, and that's a fact.
Even Paizo got that much right.
I'm pretty much entirely inclined to agree, but the issue is my GM originally rules it as the other way. But these are good talking points. The point about Hypothermia not being a defined thing is actually the most telling I think.