Condition and Endurance

Gregorius's picture

Hi, I just have a quick question regarding Condition.

It seems to be used in several areas in place of the Endurance attribute. Does Condition take the place of Endurance in order to figure out Fatigue Rate or Encumbrance? I ask because Condition is used for carrying loads under the Carrying entry in the Glossdex, but HMG does not seem to apply it when a PC is carrying their normal load of items (weapons armor,etc.). Am I mistaken or is Fatigue Rate and Encumbrance areas where condition does not apply?


ken's picture

Condition does NOT take the place of Endurance in order to figure out Fatigue Rate or Encumbrance.

Endurance is an attribute. As such it is used in the determination of various skills, including Condition. While Condition is trainable and improvable, Endurance,generally is not.

It should also be noted that the general range of Endurance is 3 to 18 while Condition effectively ranges from 5 to 95

FATIGUE RATE is determined using the ENDURANCE attribute and LOAD (weight in pounds of items worn or carried). It is the amount of penalty to physical actions that is accumulated over time while engaged in strenuous activity.

ENCUMBRANCE is an optional penalty that is simply a multiple of FATIGUE RATE. It is used (if desired) to bring the effects of FATIGUE RATE into play more quickly.

Carrying uses both ENDURANCE and CONDITION.

The CONDITION skill is tested with a modifier based on the weight being lifted in relation to the character's ENDURANCE. This mechanism is designed to determine if and how far a character might carry something of substantial weight. It's not meant to test long term weight bearing.

Gregorius's picture

Thank you Ken, I suspected as much. I played HM1 a loong time ago and HM3 not too far back. I'm trying to navigate thru some of the similar language of these 3 systems and that's why I was asking for clarification. In HM3 you divide Condition ML by 5 and the resulting figure serves the same function as Endurance. I was not sure if HMG was following a similar route and I was missing it or it just wasn't applicable.

Once again thank you for your answer.