I'm wondering how to handle when a player wants to jump over not only a creature, but all its vertical threatened squares as well. Do you combine vertical and horizontal jump DCs somehow? As far as I can tell, for a creature of 5/5 space/reach, this would require a 10 ft vertical and a 30 ft horizontal, with a total movement cost of 8 squares.
|
I'm wondering how to handle when a player wants to jump over not only a creature, but all its vertical threatened squares as well. Do you combine vertical and horizontal jump DCs somehow? As far as I can tell, for a creature of 5/5 space/reach, this would require a 10 ft vertical and a 30 ft horizontal, with a total movement cost of 8 squares.
There are no rules to exactly cover this. I would rule that when you are jumping the result of your check determines both horizontal and vertical. So if you want to jump 3 feet in the air (DC 12) and 20 feet long (DC 20) you need a total of at least 20 to succeed. So for this one the harder check is the 10 ft. vertical (DC 40) so that's what you'd need. Don't forget that if he doesn't have a running start (10') his DC doubles. And that he can't exceed his maximum movement in a round with the jump. Unless he's a monk or ninja, he's probably better off trying to acrobatics through the opponent's square (DC = CMD+5).
Its a caster with expeditious retreat and jump spells active, who also has a decent dex and skill focus (acrobatics).
|
I would suggest jumping higher.
Seriously, acrobatics(threatened squares, TS) does not rule out using it while jumping, flying, or swimming. I can easily see it used in those situations. It takes no actions to use acrobatics so that is not a limiting factor.
A few things to consider. The old 3.5 rules said you jumped up 1/4 of your total distance. This matches the long vs height jump rules for pathfinder. The wizard with 30 move and the spells specified is looking at +12 for move, +20 for jump spells, +8ish for skills and such (might be higher but assuming low level) for +40 giving him a 50ft jump on a 10. He is then jumping (50/4)=12.XXX or 10 feet. So does the enemy have 10 feet of reach? Otherwise the acrobatics roll is not necessary.
For acrobatics(TS) you are going at half move. Since he is jumping then he is jumping at half move (30) which reduces his average jump by 12 feet.
You may want to enforce the encumbrance clause here.
Finally, make the acrobatic(TS) roll as normal.
I will answer your question with a question. If he has a good Dex and Skill Focus (Acrobatics), then he must have enough ranks to easily just move through the enemy's space to avoid an AoO. Why does he need to jump at all?
The bonuses to acrobatics only apply to jumps. Its a bottleneck, only 5 ft wide, so the only options are jump completely over the enemy, or move through the enemies space somehow. He has a better chance with a huge jump than an opposed acrobatics for movement at +5.
Also, it is an air elemental bloodline sorcerer who took those spells for thematic reasons (like the wind is helping him be so fast, etc). He wants to be on the other side so he can blast (ranged touch attack) without the cover penalty to his roll.
But yeah, just a hypothetical situation. I can vaguely remember the 1/4 rule karkon mentioned now.
I like using all one roll. Make the roll for height, then use that same result to determine the max distance (his option to go shorter), and that same roll to avoid any AOO he might pick up along the way if he ends up straying into treatened squares. Just keeps it all simpler than rolling several times to figure out each part.
|
|
I like using all one roll. Make the roll for height, then use that same result to determine the max distance (his option to go shorter), and that same roll to avoid any AOO he might pick up along the way if he ends up straying into treatened squares. Just keeps it all simpler than rolling several times to figure out each part.
It would keep things simpler. But this fellow has some bonuses that apply only to certain actions in acrobatics so it would probably be better to separate the jump from the tumble.
|
I like using all one roll. Make the roll for height, then use that same result to determine the max distance (his option to go shorter), and that same roll to avoid any AOO he might pick up along the way if he ends up straying into treatened squares. Just keeps it all simpler than rolling several times to figure out each part.It would keep things simpler. But this fellow has some bonuses that apply only to certain actions in acrobatics so it would probably be better to separate the jump from the tumble.
I agree, also, I feel that it would be more cinematic if he made the distance, but not quite the height, thus taking a possible AoO as he passes just over the things head.
|
|
I seem to recall some wording back in 3.5 that gave an indication of how high one ended up being at the midpoint of a long jump.
Don't recall the number, but for some reason half the distance jumped at the midpoint seems to stick in my head.
Implying that, if one was doing a 30' jump, at the midpoint you'd be 15' above the ground.Now, our medium creature with 5' reach, is threatening up to 10' off the ground, for a 15' stretch of space.
If one assumes 5' up for each 5' across, til the midpoint, then 5' down for each 5' beyond that... I think he'd have to jump at least 35' to be clear the whole way over.
It was 1/4 the distance jumped. So 16 feet put you 4 feet high. If you look at the math in pathfinder it actually works out that way too via the jump checks.
I like using all one roll. Make the roll for height, then use that same result to determine the max distance (his option to go shorter), and that same roll to avoid any AOO he might pick up along the way if he ends up straying into treatened squares. Just keeps it all simpler than rolling several times to figure out each part.It would keep things simpler. But this fellow has some bonuses that apply only to certain actions in acrobatics so it would probably be better to separate the jump from the tumble.
I believe the jump is the Acrobatics check in question, i.e. the DC for an Acrobatics check to jump completely over an enemy's threatened area. There is no TS movement involved.
As far as I can tell, for a creature of 5/5 space/reach, this would require a 10 ft vertical and a 30 ft horizontal, with a total movement cost of 8 squares.
For a creature with 5/5 space/reach, the total movement necessary is actually 25 ft horizontal, as the space you begin in does not count as part of your jumping distance. Thus, in order to clear the threatened area, you end up travelling a total of 40 ft, which is the same as the DC for a 10 ft vertical jump.
Try mapping it out on some graph paper as a profile view of the movement rather than top-down, with the threatened area being a 3L x 2H block. The square one occupies directly in front of the block does not count against jump distance, as this is the square your jump originates. In order to clear the block, you travel through 8 squares, landing adjacent to the far side.
So my vote is for one DC 40 Acrobatics(jump) check.
Hi goodwicki, I think youre right. But if you look at the link I posted to the picture of my graph, you can see why I thought there was an extra 5 ft. Its because of the parabolic shape. of a jump. If the @ was standing right next to the red and jumped over the e it would definitely enter the red zone. But mechanically I think you are correct.
And I apologize, because I didn't even notice that link when I first read your question (hence my superfluous graphing suggestion). I see what you mean. I plotted the jump as a 2 up, 4 over, 2 down movement. With parabolic movement, I believe it would be 12 squares total/15 ft clearance (by moving the jumper back one step and having him land one step further away) for DC 60.
Generally speaking, I stop worrying about some specifics of how things really work (like parabolic jumps) once people start using magic and what not, because I feel it's more cool/"fantastic", and in my game to avoid the inevitable "player-acting-out-what-he's-doing-to-prove-that-his-character-can-do-it-no -matter-what-the-rules-say" scenario. Also, I'd feel that requiring him to move in such a fashion runs the risk of him feeling that he's being penalized for being too good at something. It seems to me that with a +40 to jump checks you shouldn't need to roll a natural 20 just to jump over some guy with a sword without him skewering you for your troubles.
