Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

PaizoCon 2014!

Can a player - acrobatics (jump) check to melee attack a flying creature?


Rules Questions

101 to 150 of 151 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Andoran

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
stjstone wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:

@stj

I'm going to repost this since it may have been lost in the flurry of discussion there and it has bearing on your question:
Let me break down my view on this so we're all perfectly clear:
1) I see no reason a person can't jump into the air with the appropriate acrobatics check and attack a target.

2) If you do not have Spring Attack, you cannot attack and continue your movement, so, if you don't have Spring Attack, your jump must terminate in the air in a space adjacent to your opponent (this can be 3D adjacent, so it could be the square directly below them, diagonally below them, etc.) make your attack, and then commence falling forcing you to make the appropriate acrobatics check for the distance fallen to avoid taking damage and landing prone.

3) If you do have Spring Attack, you may make a single Acrobatics check to jump as part of a move, strike your enemy in the middle of said move, and then continue your arc to safely land in a square of your choice within your available movement range without having to make a second Acrobatics check.

4) Falling from an adjacent square does not cost you movement, as you are not expending any particular effort to propel yourself, but it does count as deliberately falling since you chose to end your movement in an illegal square (i.e. in the air)

5) Since you are leaving a threatened square when you fall, if you do not have Spring Attack, which specifically prevents the attack of opportunity you might provoke from your target, you may provoke an AoO from your target when you leave the threatened square you attacked from.

To everyone else:
Remember, we're a community of people with shared interests. Let's all try not to get too wound up when people disagree with us on either front and focus on the fact that we're all here to help and share our love of the game :)
(cue Saturday morning Fox Kids music)

Ssalarn,

I would only add to #5 that when you provoke an AoO from falling that you would at that time be...

Sounds about right to me :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

"If you want to jump up into the air to stab a flying creature or someone on a ledge or whatever... you take a move action to jump up, a standard action to stab, and then falling back down is free. You take the falling damage on your turn after you move and attack." James Jacobs

Looks like he agrees in principle with us.

Qadira

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Okay, to the people saying that the individual would fall immediately after movement ended, I have a question. How would you rule the following situation?

Player Q is on a rooftop, Q has a 30 ft movement rate. Q needs to jump a 30ft gap. Q is 50ft from the ledge. Q opts to double move, this gives Q 60ft of total movement for the round. Q moves to the ledge and jumps. Q makes his Acrobatics check and achieves a roll of 50. This means Q has succeeded at the requisite Acrobatics check and therefore has successfully jumped the gap. However Q only has enough movement to make it 10 ft into the gap this round. Would you rule:

A. Q'smovement ends with Q midair and next round his first action must be movement that has Q complete the jump, landing on the other side of the gap.

B. Q's movement ends with Q in midair and he immediately plummets straight down.

C. regardless of remaining move Q's movement ends with Q on the other side of the gap

Andoran

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
graywulfe wrote:

Okay, to the people saying that the individual would fall immediately after movement ended, I have a question. How would you rule the following situation?

Player Q is on a rooftop, Q has a 30 ft movement rate. Q needs to jump a 30ft gap. Q is 50ft from the ledge. Q opts to double move, this gives Q 60ft of total movement for the round. Q moves to the ledge and jumps. Q makes his Acrobatics check and achieves a roll of 50. This means Q has succeeded at the requisite Acrobatics check and therefore has successfully jumped the gap. However Q only has enough movement to make it 10 ft into the gap this round. Would you rule:

A. Q'smovement ends with Q midair and next round his first action must be movement that has Q complete the jump, landing on the other side of the gap.

B. Q's movement ends with Q in midair and he immediately plummets straight down.

C. regardless of remaining move Q's movement ends with Q on the other side of the gap

Q's jump cannot exceed his available movement, so he falls from the rooftops if he attempts to jump without enough movement left.

From the PRD:
"No jump can allow you to exceed your maximum movement for the round."

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

I removed a post. Someone playing the game differently from you is not automatically wrong.

Cheliax

I would allow it, but at a penalty to hit. This penalty is to represent the character attacking while not being on solid footing. About a -2 to -4 depending (have not decided yet). Shaken gives you a -2, and entangled gives you a -2, giving a penalty (-2 to -4) for not having any footing does not seem out of place.

Also you would generate an AoO from falling, and may have that same penalty to your AC.

Please note, this is just how I would rule it. I am not claiming this is RAW.

Andoran

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Well, you can find JJ's opinion on falling here.

Take that as you will.

That I will.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

People are actually defending that if you don't have Spring Attack, you can't attack while jumping? Or that without the feat you somehow freeze in midair?

Others even implied that your land speed somehow decides your falling speed! What the hell? Does the size of your legs affect how gravity works on you?

By God, that's stupid...

Falling is either a free action or not an action (probably the latter, as it isn't the character itself who is moving downward).

The rules say that you when falling, you immediatly move 500ft down.

So why the hell can't the guy make an Acrobatic check, jump 60ft (move action) in the air, attack (standard action), then fall 60ft (free action)?

So simple, so easy... It works and everybody is happy, including Leapy.

Qadira

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ssalarn wrote:
graywulfe wrote:

Okay, to the people saying that the individual would fall immediately after movement ended, I have a question. How would you rule the following situation?

Player Q is on a rooftop, Q has a 30 ft movement rate. Q needs to jump a 30ft gap. Q is 50ft from the ledge. Q opts to double move, this gives Q 60ft of total movement for the round. Q moves to the ledge and jumps. Q makes his Acrobatics check and achieves a roll of 50. This means Q has succeeded at the requisite Acrobatics check and therefore has successfully jumped the gap. However Q only has enough movement to make it 10 ft into the gap this round. Would you rule:

A. Q's movement ends with Q midair and next round his first action must be movement that has Q complete the jump, landing on the other side of the gap.

B. Q's movement ends with Q in midair and he immediately plummets straight down.

C. regardless of remaining move Q's movement ends with Q on the other side of the gap

Q's jump cannot exceed his available movement, so he falls from the rooftops if he attempts to jump without enough movement left.

From the PRD:
"No jump can allow you to exceed your maximum movement for the round."

That produces a Wile E Coyote image for me. Common Sense would indicate that that is not the intent of that line in the rules. At least from my point of view.

In character, at the end of your turn, you don't wait numerous iterations of 6 seconds as every other participant of the combat does their actions. In character, at the end of your turn, you immediately begin your next turn. The rule you are quoting is there to prevent option C from being the result. Option A is the only remotely realistic result. To me, options B and C are not just wrong they are ridiculous interpretations.


Lemmy wrote:

People are actually defending that if you don't have Spring Attack, you can't attack while jumping? Or that without the feat you somehow freeze in midair?

Others even implied that your land speed somehow decides your falling speed! What the hell? Does the size of your legs affect how gravity works on you?

By God, that's stupid...

Falling is either a free action or not an action (probably the latter, as it isn't the character itself who is moving downward).

The rules say that you when falling, you immediatly move 500ft down.

So why the hell can't the guy make an Acrobatic check, jump 60ft (move action) in the air, attack (standard action), then fall 60ft (free action)?

So simple, so easy... It works and everybody is happy, including Leapy.

No one said you need spring attack to jump and attack someone. Please read people's posts instead of making assumptions as you just cloud the issue further for new readers. Pretty much everyone is in agreement with what you said, having spring attack allows you to potentially avoid falling damage and the attack of opportunity from falling away from the enemy. Without spring attack you take falling damage and provoke an attack of opportunity. Though you can use Acrobatics to negate the falling damage assuming the height is not above 19 feet.


graywulfe wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
graywulfe wrote:

Okay, to the people saying that the individual would fall immediately after movement ended, I have a question. How would you rule the following situation?

Player Q is on a rooftop, Q has a 30 ft movement rate. Q needs to jump a 30ft gap. Q is 50ft from the ledge. Q opts to double move, this gives Q 60ft of total movement for the round. Q moves to the ledge and jumps. Q makes his Acrobatics check and achieves a roll of 50. This means Q has succeeded at the requisite Acrobatics check and therefore has successfully jumped the gap. However Q only has enough movement to make it 10 ft into the gap this round. Would you rule:

A. Q's movement ends with Q midair and next round his first action must be movement that has Q complete the jump, landing on the other side of the gap.

B. Q's movement ends with Q in midair and he immediately plummets straight down.

C. regardless of remaining move Q's movement ends with Q on the other side of the gap

Q's jump cannot exceed his available movement, so he falls from the rooftops if he attempts to jump without enough movement left.

From the PRD:
"No jump can allow you to exceed your maximum movement for the round."

That produces a Wile E Coyote image for me. Common Sense would indicate that that is not the intent of that line in the rules. At least from my point of view.

In character, at the end of your turn, you don't wait numerous iterations of 6 seconds as every other participant of the combat does their actions. In character, at the end of your turn, you immediately begin your next turn. The rule you are quoting is there to prevent option C from being the result. Option A is the only remotely realistic result. To me, options B and C are not just wrong they are ridiculous interpretations.

I think your interpretation makes sense though having someone mid air through the round is kind of awkward, but I see you reasoning that the character made the jump test successfully, but it will take him more than the one round to complete because he used some of his move up already. RAW it is clear that it doesn't work and the guy falls, but I think your ruling makes sense. Seems like it is better left up to the actual tests results to limit how far people can jump especially given that your speed over 30 feet is a bonus to your jump checks and if you don't have the move to cover the distance it just takes you more than one round to do it.


Ssalarn wrote:


4) Falling from an adjacent square does not cost you movement, as you are not expending any particular effort to propel yourself, but it does count as deliberately falling since you chose to end your movement in an illegal square (i.e. in the air)

This is kind of a side note, and I'm not sure if there is official rule on this, but is ending your move in an open space with nothing under your feet an illegal square? I'm not sure that it is. You can't end your move inside another creature, or in a wall, or some other solid object (barring various magic effects), those are certainly illegal places to move to. I would think ending your move in the air is a valid space to be in, else you couldn't walk over the edge of a cliff - since falling would immediately end your move and thus the move was illegal and couldn't be taken in the first place. At least when I think illegal move I think you actually cannot do it because it is physically impossible to do. IMO its a legal square to move to, there are simply consequences for being there - in this case falling to the ground.

Graywulfe wrote:

A. Q'smovement ends with Q midair and next round his first action must be movement that has Q complete the jump, landing on the other side of the gap.

B. Q's movement ends with Q in midair and he immediately plummets straight down.

C. regardless of remaining move Q's movement ends with Q on the other side of the gap

I actually house rule A, with the only actions they can take on subsequent turns till they land being movement for their standard and/or move actions in the round. I don't even really find it odd mechanically for them to 'hang' there during the round while everyone else does stuff. They simply continue to move in the direction of the jump, at their max movement speed (double move) till they land.

I don't know that I've actually ever had anyone attempt a jump of more than 20' distance, but it has come up a couple times where they move 50', jump, get 10' over the gap, and wait till next turn to complete the jump.

The rule simply indicates that your max air velocity while jumping cannot exceed your normal movement speed and say nothing, so far as I'm aware, that you must be on the ground again by the end of your turn.


Not sure what's still being debated here. After reading through, about Half the posters have agreed on some small variation of the following-
(assumed to not have spring attack)

1. Acrobatics check for the jump as part of movement.

2. Attack must be at the end of movement which means the player runs out of actions in mid-air.

3. Player falls (because falling happens immediately and IS NOT AN ACTION) provoking an AoO (assuming the monster can). The player is flat footed for this AoO. At the end of his action the player is back on the ground in one way or another

4. Player jumped with the foreknowledge he would be falling at the end of his actions so a reflex save to avoid damage and being prone, is allowed.

Now I'm going to make the argument worse by reminding you what happens when a flying creature is struck in melee ariel combat. The struck creature has to make an immediate fly check or lose altitude. This could result in no AoO by the creature (nothing in RAW about this but I would rule that if the creature fails, its too busy trying not to crash to the ground to attack you) or the creature and player tumbling to the ground in a heap.

Attacked while flying
"You are not considered flat-footed while flying. If you are flying using wings and you take damage while flying, you must make a DC 10 Fly check to avoid losing 10 feet of altitude. This descent does not provoke an attack of opportunity and does not count against a creature’s movement."

Then there's also this which doesn't necessarily apply here but could happen-

"Collision While Flying
If you are using wings to fly and you collide with an object equal to your size or larger, you must immediately make a DC 25 Fly check to avoid plummeting to the ground, taking the appropriate falling damage."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
graywulfe wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
graywulfe wrote:

Okay, to the people saying that the individual would fall immediately after movement ended, I have a question. How would you rule the following situation?

Player Q is on a rooftop, Q has a 30 ft movement rate. Q needs to jump a 30ft gap. Q is 50ft from the ledge. Q opts to double move, this gives Q 60ft of total movement for the round. Q moves to the ledge and jumps. Q makes his Acrobatics check and achieves a roll of 50. This means Q has succeeded at the requisite Acrobatics check and therefore has successfully jumped the gap. However Q only has enough movement to make it 10 ft into the gap this round. Would you rule:

A. Q's movement ends with Q midair and next round his first action must be movement that has Q complete the jump, landing on the other side of the gap.

B. Q's movement ends with Q in midair and he immediately plummets straight down.

C. regardless of remaining move Q's movement ends with Q on the other side of the gap

Q's jump cannot exceed his available movement, so he falls from the rooftops if he attempts to jump without enough movement left.

From the PRD:
"No jump can allow you to exceed your maximum movement for the round."

That produces a Wile E Coyote image for me. Common Sense would indicate that that is not the intent of that line in the rules. At least from my point of view.

In character, at the end of your turn, you don't wait numerous iterations of 6 seconds as every other participant of the combat does their actions. In character, at the end of your turn, you immediately begin your next turn. The rule you are quoting is there to prevent option C from being the result. Option A is the only remotely realistic result. To me, options B and C are not just wrong they are ridiculous interpretations.

Option A seems like the better, more realistic option at first glance, and it would probably be the one that I would use in my own game as a GM. However, it his also the option that players could abuse the most. Imagine a Monk that uses a standard action to punch a melee Figter in the face, then uses his remaining move action to move and jump, ending his turn in mid-air and preventing the Fighter from attacking him with his melee weapon. Even better, imagine a ninja that jumps and throws a shuriken in mid-air, ending his turn in an inaccessible square. o_O


1 person marked this as a favorite.

@ Maerimydra

LOL that is an awesome visual.


BiggDawg wrote:

@ Maerimydra

LOL that is an awesome visual.

Indeed. If I were controlling the Figher in the the scenario described above, I would move to the square where the Monk should land (if that's even possible) and use a ready-action to hit him as soon as he lands on the ground. ;)

Andoran

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Maerimydra wrote:
graywulfe wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
graywulfe wrote:

Okay, to the people saying that the individual would fall immediately after movement ended, I have a question. How would you rule the following situation?

Player Q is on a rooftop, Q has a 30 ft movement rate. Q needs to jump a 30ft gap. Q is 50ft from the ledge. Q opts to double move, this gives Q 60ft of total movement for the round. Q moves to the ledge and jumps. Q makes his Acrobatics check and achieves a roll of 50. This means Q has succeeded at the requisite Acrobatics check and therefore has successfully jumped the gap. However Q only has enough movement to make it 10 ft into the gap this round. Would you rule:

A. Q's movement ends with Q midair and next round his first action must be movement that has Q complete the jump, landing on the other side of the gap.

B. Q's movement ends with Q in midair and he immediately plummets straight down.

C. regardless of remaining move Q's movement ends with Q on the other side of the gap

Q's jump cannot exceed his available movement, so he falls from the rooftops if he attempts to jump without enough movement left.

From the PRD:
"No jump can allow you to exceed your maximum movement for the round."

That produces a Wile E Coyote image for me. Common Sense would indicate that that is not the intent of that line in the rules. At least from my point of view.

In character, at the end of your turn, you don't wait numerous iterations of 6 seconds as every other participant of the combat does their actions. In character, at the end of your turn, you immediately begin your next turn. The rule you are quoting is there to prevent option C from being the result. Option A is the only remotely realistic result. To me, options B and C are not just wrong they are ridiculous interpretations.

Option A seems like the better, more realistic option at first glance, and it would probably be the one that I would use in my own game as a GM. However, it his...

So what you are saying that if I were a jump master and I could easily jump 15’ vertically and I had 40’ of movement.

I could then make a range attack (standard action round 1) move 25’ & jump 15’ high (Completing round 1's move action). At that point my standard action and move action are complete and I would hang in the air out of reach from medium sized melee. Then round 2 I could land completing last rounds 15’ of movement move 10’ Jump again 15’ high (completing my move action for round 2) and attack from 15’ in the air. So unless people readied like you said, I would be immune to medium sized melee attacks. – unless a melee attacker could jump…

Rinse and repeat land - run - jump & attack through out the battle.

I don’t know if I like that… Would that fly in Society play?


stjstone wrote:
I don’t know if I like that… Would that fly in Society play?

Probably not. :P

Since the movement of the jumping character was not completed, I think it would be fair game for the GM to house rule that the airborne character could be attacked both from the last valid square he occupied before jumping AND his invalid, 15 feet above ground, position. That would prevent any kind of abuse, I think.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Actually I think that may be a bad tactic. As if I were defending against that (land, run, jump & attack) I would ready where the jumper would land. On his way down he would provoke and I would get my AoO and ready on the jumper...

Best laid plans.


stjstone wrote:

Actually I think that may be a bad tactic. As if I were defending against that (land, run, jump & attack) I would ready where the jumper would land. On his way down he would provoke and I would get my AoO and ready on the jumper...

Best laid plans.

You couldn't reach the said square with a speed of 30 feet if the monk has a speed of 50 feet and jumps only 15 feet high. The monk could also jump horizontally to move further away from you while still gaining altitude (1/4 of his Acrobatic check, in feet, at the apex of the jump).


stjstone wrote:
Maerimydra wrote:
graywulfe wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
graywulfe wrote:

Okay, to the people saying that the individual would fall immediately after movement ended, I have a question. How would you rule the following situation?

Player Q is on a rooftop, Q has a 30 ft movement rate. Q needs to jump a 30ft gap. Q is 50ft from the ledge. Q opts to double move, this gives Q 60ft of total movement for the round. Q moves to the ledge and jumps. Q makes his Acrobatics check and achieves a roll of 50. This means Q has succeeded at the requisite Acrobatics check and therefore has successfully jumped the gap. However Q only has enough movement to make it 10 ft into the gap this round. Would you rule:

A. Q's movement ends with Q midair and next round his first action must be movement that has Q complete the jump, landing on the other side of the gap.

B. Q's movement ends with Q in midair and he immediately plummets straight down.

C. regardless of remaining move Q's movement ends with Q on the other side of the gap

Q's jump cannot exceed his available movement, so he falls from the rooftops if he attempts to jump without enough movement left.

From the PRD:
"No jump can allow you to exceed your maximum movement for the round."

That produces a Wile E Coyote image for me. Common Sense would indicate that that is not the intent of that line in the rules. At least from my point of view.

In character, at the end of your turn, you don't wait numerous iterations of 6 seconds as every other participant of the combat does their actions. In character, at the end of your turn, you immediately begin your next turn. The rule you are quoting is there to prevent option C from being the result. Option A is the only remotely realistic result. To me, options B and C are not just wrong they are ridiculous interpretations.

Option A seems like the better, more realistic option at first glance, and it would probably be the one that I would use in my own game as
...

Yes that would be horibbly abused and break conventional combat. Which is why I go with the falling option. It allows for the attack, makes it harder than an average attack, and presents some risk because it's a risky maneuver. It May not be as "realistic" but what is in this game.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Exactly, falling is the only option that doesn't lead to ludicrous combat scenarios with people hovering in midair making attacks of opportunity with Combat Patrol while sitting nicely out of reach of everyone with a lower initiative than them. It also messes with the action economy since you're starting your next turn finishing a move action you started the round before. Does this take up your move? Do you get another move, effectively making you the fastest man alive?
How about playing a Zen Archer who jumps up in the air and then uses the Improved Snap Shot line of feats to gain opportunity attacks on people from his new elevated vantage point?

The only option that doesn't destroy action economy and various other aspects of the game or require you to re-tool or make arbitrary rulings on dozens of situations and feats is that a person who jumps and doesn't have enough movement to land it, falls.

That's also the option supported by the rules in the Core Rulebook.


Would be a good rule for a crouching tiger hidden dragon style game maybe.


So, if someone is long jumping, they are presumably launching themselves at close to a 45 degree angle and following a roughly parabolic curve, in order to attain maximum possible lateral distance.

The rules restrict jumping movement to not exceed your speed. Most people, I would think, would measure the linear distance traveled to determine if this limit has been reached.

But I suppose most people in this thread would actually measure the length of the parabolic curve traveled (which will obviously be greater than the linear forward movement) and use that to decide if the jumper has jumped "too far." I mean, that's the distance he's actually travelling, amirite?

*sigh* I don't think I can handle this ridiculousness anymore.

Spoiler:
Long jumping distance should be based on lateral displacement, from point A to B.
High Jumping should be based on starting elevation and peak elevation attained during the jump.
The distance moved due to gravity should not be getting counted against either.
/my view


StreamOfTheSky wrote:

So, if someone is long jumping, they are presumably launching themselves at close to a 45 degree angle and following a roughly parabolic curve, in order to attain maximum possible lateral distance.

The rules restrict jumping movement to not exceed your speed. Most people, I would think, would measure the linear distance traveled to determine if this limit has been reached.

But I suppose most people in this thread would actually measure the length of the parabolic curve traveled (which will obviously be greater than the linear forward movement) and use that to decide if the jumper has jumped "too far." I mean, that's the distance he's actually travelling, amirite?

*sigh* I don't think I can handle this ridiculousness anymore.

** spoiler omitted **

I agree with you about vertical elevation not counting against your maximum movement for the round when performing a long jump, but what about exclusively vertical jumps? Should a character be able to move 5 feet, then jump as high as he can, then move 5 feet again, and jump as high as he can again, and so on until he runs out of "horizontal" movement?


No. Like I said, the difference between starting and peak elevation would be your "jump distance" for high jumps. If you moved 5 ft, then vertically jumped 5 ft, then moved 5 ft, then vertically jumped 5 ft, you would have moved a total of 20 ft.


StreamOfTheSky wrote:
No. Like I said, the difference between starting and peak elevation would be your "jump distance" for high jumps. If you moved 5 ft, then vertically jumped 5 ft, then moved 5 ft, then vertically jumped 5 ft, you would have moved a total of 20 ft.

Agreed, but I don't believe that "most people in this thread would actually measure the length of the parabolic curve traveled". Why did you get this impression?


Because by their own arguments, that is the length of distance the long jumper has actually traveled, just as with a high jump it's the distance gone up + the distance back down. With a long jump you are also moving up a bit and then back down, as part of the jump, hose goal is to move laterally. If we're including the extra movement caused and/or required by gravity for one, why not the other?

And yes, of course that's not how I think it should be. That's absurd.

Grand Lodge

I think the questions have been answered here a long time ago. However, if I was in a game where there were a lot of flying creatures I'd make a monk and take Improved Grapple as one of my bonus feats. You get High Jump at 5th level so you don't even need a running start and have a bonus on jump checks equal to your monk level. You jump up, grapple the flyer, and see if you can just drag it down so everyone can pummel it.


Did PF retain the 3E rule about only being able to carry aloft a light load? If so, the monk's sheer weight alone would likely cause the two creatures to fall. That would be cool. I'd allow some sort of opposed grapple to see if either can force the other guy to take the brunt of the fall / use him as a "crash mat". :D

Grand Lodge

I can't find anything that mentions that for PF. I think it would just use the encumbrance rulese and slow the fly speed down. I think requiring a fly check or the creature loses altitude would be fair though, maybe the DC is equal to the CMD of the grappler?


Just because the idea/situation is cool, I would say: YES!!!!!

I would handle it like a charge attack, the player have to make the appropiate acrobatics check and at the end of his round he's on the ground in the field on the other side of the enemy.

You don't need rules for everything, that's what so nice at P6P RPGs, if someone has a nice idea, simply name some appropiate rolls/modifiers and done.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Mid-air is not an illegal square.

Although your jumping distance cannot be greater than your move, it's entirely possible to move, say, 20 feet then make a horizontal jump of 20 feet without breaking that rule, even if you have a move of only 30 feet. Of course, at the end of your move you'd be half-way across the bottomless chasm (because, before you moved, your attack action took out the guard that was in your way).

It makes no sense to enforce a vertical fall just because the game mechanics say my turn has ended.

The rules abstract the constant, simultaneous actions of multiple combatants. No-one thinks a running character moves 120 feet in a fraction of a second, then stays where he is for six seconds, then carries on stopping and starting for his entire run. But that's how it looks on the game board. Why? Because 24 simultaneous combatants whose actions are calculated using advanced calculus is less easy than 'taking turns'! : )

So, if we are happy to all attack that runner in the same square because he's finished his turn, we should be happy to let someone seem to 'hang in mid-air' because he couldn't finish his jump in that arbitrary six-second chunk of game time.

Of course, we don't want 'hovering monks' to ruin our games!

The declared intent of 'taking a running jump to attack the flying creature who's out of reach otherwise', sounds like the charge full-round action to me!

Requiring a charge to do this fits with the concept and prevents hovering monks. Also, as you make the acrobatics check to jump, calculate the landing square as normal. After the attack at the end of the charge, your turn ends (yes, in mid-air). On your next turn the first action you must take is a move action to continue your jump as calculated previously. If one move isn't enough you must keep using move actions until you land. After landing you may use any remaining actions normally. When you take that move action to complete your jump you provoke AoOs for movement normally. All skill checks are rolled normally, as part of movement.

How do you think that would work?

Grand Lodge

The rules already prevent 'hovering' characters. Jump under the Acrobatics skill on page 88: "No jump can allow you to exceed your maxiumum movement for the round." It further says "For a running jump, the result of your Acrobatics check indicates the distance traveled in the jump (and if the check fails, the distance which you actually land and fall prone). Halve this result for a standing long jump to determine where you land."

To me it soundsd as if the intention is that in any given jump movement you have a destination planned for your landing, somewhere within the scope of your movement speed, and try to hit the DC of landing there. If your goal is to jump as far as possible then you take both your speed and check result into account to determine the landing square. Unfortunately the rules are vague and it doesn't specifically mention if landing from a high jump costs movement.

A jump is either a move action or part of one and move actions are resolved before you can take any other action; with a jump your movement is resolved when you land (success or failure). If you wanted to high jump to grab a ledge in combat it would work because the grab is part of your move, but you cannot make a combat grab as part of a move without some special ability that allows such a thing because an attack grab is a standard action by itself. This would mean that you probably couldn't attack a flying creature using jump unless you had Spring Attack or a similar ability.

Silver Crusade

You can jump during the movement part of the full-round charge action. The charge action says that you must attack the target of your charge as soon as you enter the first square from which you can attack the target. You also must move before, but not after, that attack.

Is there any RAW that says we can't do this?


Charge has to be in a straight line.

If you have the ability to turn during a charge it should work fine.

Silver Crusade

StreamOfTheSky wrote:

Charge has to be in a straight line.

If you have the ability to turn during a charge it should work fine.

Since you can jump over obstacles as you charge, the 'straight line' part is a straight line in two dimensions.


If you don't take a running start, possibly.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
StreamOfTheSky wrote:

Charge has to be in a straight line.

If you have the ability to turn during a charge it should work fine.

Since you can jump over obstacles as you charge, the 'straight line' part is a straight line in two dimensions.

Malachi Silverclaw,

Correct

Per James Jacobs, @ http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz2b6x?Jumping-Charge-official-word-would-be-nice #0

Nothing's changed here, really. Jumping is a part of movement. If you're charging and part of that charge needs to be a jump, that's fine. You'll just need to make the appropriate Acrobatics DC to make the jump; if you fail the jump, obviously your charge is wasted.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I think the rules below hold up...
.
.
.
.
From Ssalarn:

1) I see no reason a person can't jump into the air with the appropriate acrobatics check and attack a target.

2) If you do not have Spring Attack, you cannot attack and continue your movement, so, if you don't have Spring Attack, your jump must terminate in the air in a space adjacent to your opponent (this can be 3D adjacent, so it could be the square directly below them, diagonally below them, etc.) make your attack, and then commence falling forcing you to make the appropriate acrobatics check for the distance fallen to avoid taking damage and landing prone.

3) If you do have Spring Attack, you may make a single Acrobatics check to jump as part of a move, strike your enemy in the middle of said move, and then continue your arc to safely land in a square of your choice within your available movement range without having to make a second Acrobatics check.

4) Falling from an adjacent square does not cost you movement, as you are not expending any particular effort to propel yourself, but it does count as deliberately falling since you chose to end your movement in an illegal square (i.e. in the air)

5) Since you are leaving a threatened square when you fall, if you do not have Spring Attack, which specifically prevents the attack of opportunity you might provoke from your target, you may provoke an AoO from your target when you leave the threatened square you attacked from.

From stjstone:

I would only add to 5) that when you provoke an AoO from falling that you would at that time be flat-footed.

Also a note on falling:

"If you want to jump up into the air to stab a flying creature or someone on a ledge or whatever... you take a move action to jump up, a standard action to stab, and then falling back down is free. You take the falling damage on your turn after you move and attack." James Jacobs

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
stjstone wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
StreamOfTheSky wrote:

Charge has to be in a straight line.

If you have the ability to turn during a charge it should work fine.

Since you can jump over obstacles as you charge, the 'straight line' part is a straight line in two dimensions.

Malachi Silverclaw,

Correct

Per James Jacobs, @ http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz2b6x?Jumping-Charge-official-word-would-be-nice #0

Nothing's changed here, really. Jumping is a part of movement. If you're charging and part of that charge needs to be a jump, that's fine. You'll just need to make the appropriate Acrobatics DC to make the jump; if you fail the jump, obviously your charge is wasted.

By the way the above was in relation to jumping over rough terrain during a charge.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The can you hang in midair per below:

If your jump check exceeds your allowed movement you remain at the end of your movement in air and on your next round you will complete your distance jumped as part of next rounds movement.

Answer NO:

from JJ:

Jumping is part of your movement. You can't jump further than you can move. If you have a speed of 30 feet and you have an ungodly high Acrobatics check and want to jump over a 40 foot gap... you'll need to take 2 move actions to do that since you can only cover 30 feet of that jump in a move.

Rule on page 88:
"No jump can allow you to exceed your maxiumum movement for the round." It further says "For a running jump, the result of your Acrobatics check indicates the distance traveled in the jump (and if the check fails, the distance which you actually land and fall prone). Halve this result for a standing long jump to determine where you land."

Silver Crusade

stjstone wrote:

The can you hang in midair per below:

If your jump check exceeds your allowed movement you remain at the end of your movement in air and on your next round you will complete your distance jumped as part of next rounds movement.

Answer NO:

from JJ:

Jumping is part of your movement. You can't jump further than you can move. If you have a speed of 30 feet and you have an ungodly high Acrobatics check and want to jump over a 40 foot gap... you'll need to take 2 move actions to do that since you can only cover 30 feet of that jump in a move.

Rule on page 88:
"No jump can allow you to exceed your maxiumum movement for the round." It further says "For a running jump, the result of your Acrobatics check indicates the distance traveled in the jump (and if the check fails, the distance which you actually land and fall prone). Halve this result for a standing long jump to determine where you land."

So, if my move is 30 feet, my move for the round in which I charge is 60 feet. Therefore any jump I make as part of the charge cannot exceed 60 feet.

If I want to jump up 5 feet to attack the monster in 'the third cube up' I can make a long jump of 20 feet after moving 10 feet at ground level.

Acrobatics wrote:-

''...No jump can allow you to exceed your maximum movement for the round...''

If this means ''the distance of your jump cannot exceed your move rate'' then I'm fine as my jumping distance was only 20 feet.

If it means ''if you run out of movement while still in mid-air, your turn ends, and you must use move actions to complete the jump as your first action(s) on your next turn'', then fine the action I took this round was charge, a full round action. I charge, I move and jump as the movement part of the charge action, then I attack as part of the charge action. Next turn, if I'm still in mid-air, I must use move actions to complete that jump until I land.

Either way, the charge option works.

Cheliax

Personally, I am not a fan of it being as a charge. I think that during a jump and attack that you should not get a bonus to hit your target unless you have training in jumping and attacking (spring attack). I think that normally it should be harder (as you do not have stable footing or training to pull it off perfectly). Please note, I am not saying that you cannot do it, only that you do it at a penalty instead of a bonus if you do not have the spring attack or flyby feat.

the charge as describe above is more of an aerial overrun (as you continue past your target once you are done) or a flightless flyby attack.

Silver Crusade

That would be true if the charger moved after the attack on the same turn. But he doesn't.

In a normal attack in a normal round you can move+attack in one round, then move as your first action in the next round. Or you can charge in one round then move as your first action in the next, provoking AoOs as normal. That's what the jump/charge is doing; it's not like spring/flyby attack. It would be more like spring/flyby attack if he 'fell' after the attack.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
stjstone wrote:


"No jump can allow you to exceed your maxiumum movement for the round."

This could be understood 2 ways.

1) If your move speed is 30' you cannot jump a distance of more than 30'
2) If you had, say 30' of movement (and a single move action left), you couldn't use it to jump a gap of 60' and be on the other side of the gap at the end of your turn. E.g, you cannot move through the air more than 30' per move action if your move speed is 30'. You move 30' in the air (you have now moved your maximum movement for the round and cannot move any further this round). The following round you use up your move action to move the other 30', then have your standard action to continue moving or do something else, and you still have not exceeded your movement for the round.

The 2nd interpretation is the one that makes more sense when applied to real world physics (ignoring that no real world human can jump that kind of distance).

I don't see the hovering monk problem as a real issue.

Monk jumps and hovers at the end of his turn. I move up and ready an action to smack him as soon as he is in reach. Next turn he falls to earth (for free falling action), I smack him, he attacks me and jumps again. I AoO for his movement/jump. My turn I ready an action to smack him again. Neither of us is getting full attacks. But that would be the case if he merely moved 10' away from me each turn as well. The end result of number of attacks we are getting on each other remains unchanged. Such a player trying to game the system in this way also reveals themselves as a munchkin and can be disinvited to future games, or you can invite them to come play the rpg TOON sometime instead.

Silver Crusade

Well said!

I think it means the second version. The thing about the jump/charge is that it satisfies both ways of understanding the rule. : )

Qadira

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I wait until people abuse the rules to adjust away from what I believe is the correct interpretation of the rules.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I think the other issue with ending up in the air after moving, jumping and attacking a flying creature is that you can’t end your turn in an illegal square. I believe that the air (when not flying or such) is an illegal square.

Page 194 Accidentally Ending Movement in an Illegal Space:
Sometimes a character ends its movement while moving through a space where it’s not allowed to stop. When that happens, put your miniature in the last legal position you occupied, or the closest legal position, if there’s a legal position that’s closer.

The closest legal position for a jumping creature out of actions would be falling to the ground.

Silver Crusade

stjstone wrote:

I think the other issue with ending up in the air after moving, jumping and attacking a flying creature is that you can’t end your turn in an illegal square. I believe that the air (when not flying or such) is an illegal square.

Page 194 Accidentally Ending Movement in an Illegal Space:
Sometimes a character ends its movement while moving through a space where it’s not allowed to stop. When that happens, put your miniature in the last legal position you occupied, or the closest legal position, if there’s a legal position that’s closer.

The closest legal position for a jumping creature out of actions would be falling to the ground.

There is nothing illegal about a square in mid-air! Unless that square is occupied by a creature, or is impassable (like a wall) then it's legal.

If you can move through an unoccupied square, then it's a legal square. If nothing is stopping you from jumping through or to that square, then it's legal.

Quote:-

''Ending Your Movement: You can't end your movement in the same square as another creature unless it is helpless.''

A square in mid-air that is unoccupied by a non-helpless creature is a legal space. If being in mid-air was illegal then nothing could fly. Flying creatures move through the air by whatever means they use to fly. Jumping creatures move through the air by using the acrobatics skill to jump.

101 to 150 of 151 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Rules Questions / Can a player - acrobatics (jump) check to melee attack a flying creature? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.