12-18-2017, 01:52 PM
Can't really get what you mean with fear effects. You mean that if a frightened creature is affected by some new kind of fear then it becomes panicked? Can't see this written anywhere.
My problem with stacking fatigue in case of starvation and thirst is that they are handled at the same point at the same mechanism and you don't "do" something that causes fatigue when you continue starving. It "happens." So from rules lawyering perspective I would say they don't stack (no exhaustion).
From reality perspective, as well as how I assume the rule was intended, I guess that they stack (even two failed checks for same thing do) and thus cause exhaustion.
From DM perspective, considering the current effect; its possible severe consequences; and the storyteller's intent behind what's going on-- I would really like to say that they don't stack-- that is, unless that creates an undesired precedent case for similar situations in the future.
Many forum posters agree that starvation and thirst, RAW, are a joke. You can go 3 days without being fed, then eat (say, after 71 hours to avoid the necessary Con check), and go 3 more days without food and without consequences. I agree with them that these figures should stack, like, one full day of eating decreases your "backlog" by one day and you don't have to save that day but if you skip one day again then there you go again with as many days plus one. Normally this shouldn't be an issue and I don't plan any "hunger games" along this looooong adventure chain (remember we are still in chapter 2 of 7) just find this interesting to think about it.
Of course, a starving barbarian would be exhausted after a rage (to the end of the encounter which is usually sooner than the end of the rage...).
My problem with stacking fatigue in case of starvation and thirst is that they are handled at the same point at the same mechanism and you don't "do" something that causes fatigue when you continue starving. It "happens." So from rules lawyering perspective I would say they don't stack (no exhaustion).
From reality perspective, as well as how I assume the rule was intended, I guess that they stack (even two failed checks for same thing do) and thus cause exhaustion.
From DM perspective, considering the current effect; its possible severe consequences; and the storyteller's intent behind what's going on-- I would really like to say that they don't stack-- that is, unless that creates an undesired precedent case for similar situations in the future.
Many forum posters agree that starvation and thirst, RAW, are a joke. You can go 3 days without being fed, then eat (say, after 71 hours to avoid the necessary Con check), and go 3 more days without food and without consequences. I agree with them that these figures should stack, like, one full day of eating decreases your "backlog" by one day and you don't have to save that day but if you skip one day again then there you go again with as many days plus one. Normally this shouldn't be an issue and I don't plan any "hunger games" along this looooong adventure chain (remember we are still in chapter 2 of 7) just find this interesting to think about it.
Of course, a starving barbarian would be exhausted after a rage (to the end of the encounter which is usually sooner than the end of the rage...).
