|
Now assuming no penalties taking 10 is a 10 foot jump. A 10 foot jump over 100 foot chasm...dangerous.
What about a 10ft jump? With a +10 bonus?
What about a 12ft jump, with a +10?
You slip, you land awkwardly and fall back. You mistime your jump.
That's what happens when you roll a 1. Taking 10 is when you take a moment to avoid that result instead of pushing for a 20.
It's been discussed before. You absolutely CAN take 10 to jump a chasm of any depth, provided you are not distracted or threatened.
|
Now assuming no penalties taking 10 is a 10 foot jump. A 10 foot jump over 100 foot chasm...dangerous.What about a 10ft jump? With a +10 bonus?
What about a 12ft jump, with a +10?
You slip, you land awkwardly and fall back. You mistime your jump.That's what happens when you roll a 1. Taking 10 is when you take a moment to avoid that result instead of pushing for a 20.
Yes, because if there is no immediate danger, you can take 10.
If you may fall to your death if you fail the check, there is immediate danger.
The danger of falling to your death.
|
|
It's been discussed before. You absolutely CAN take 10 to jump a chasm of any depth, provided you are not distracted or threatened.
Your link leads to a thread where Sean basically says it's up the GM if they think it is part of the challenge of the adventure.
I think if you tell the players "There is a gap over a 100 foot fall" that means they roll dice. If they don't roll dice, why am I putting a gap there?
|
|
The danger of falling to your death.That's not immediate. That's a consequence of failure.
That is like saying that getting shot at isn't immediate danger unless you get hit.
If I have a gap the players can simply step over, I say "You step over a 100 chasm"
If they need to jump it because they can't simply step over it, it is because they can fall to their doom. So they need to roll dice or come up with solutions that allow them to cross the gap, because if they fail they die, and that is danger.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Don't track weight, arrows, rations or anything like that. It doesn't add anything to our games. We want to play fantasy, not accountants.
|
|
That is like saying that getting shot at isn't immediate danger unless you get hit.
Apples to oranges, that's an obvious threat.
If I have a gap the players can simply step over, I say "You step over a 100 chasm"
If they need to jump it because they can't simply step over it, it is because they can fall to their doom. So they need to roll dice or come up with solutions that allow them to cross the gap, because if they fail they die, and that is danger.
And they can choose to take 10 instead of dealing with the randomness of the dice. Even taking 10, they can still fail if they misjudge the DC. PCs have different Acrobatics modifiers, so one person can take 10 while another has to trust in his luck or find a different method. Your stance only holds true if ALL characters can simply 'step over' the challenge.
But it is an interpretation, and we should really make a new thread if we want to argue it. :)
In the thread over on Ultimate Equipment, it is kind of getting derailed a bit by the discussion on encumbrance. So I figured that I would start one for just this topic.
The background for this starts on page 6 and goes on, but the basic question I am posing here to you, the players of this game and the DMs who run this game is this: do you track equipment and gear weight? Do you use the encumbrance rules in the Core Rulebook?
I know, for myself, that I do. Perhaps it is because of how I came to the game, but I cannot really picture just hand-waving all the stuff that adventurers routinely carry on their backs. In my first games, if you didn't have a piece of equipment on your sheet, you were out of luck. And if you HAD a piece of equipment on your sheet, it had best have a weight alongside it!
Now, we used mules many times to haul our gear, especially when looting huge piles of treasure (and later on as we continued, bags of holding and portable holes).
What about you?
How do you play?
Do you figure encumbrance for everything your players carry, and or do you see it as something outside the story?
Tell us.
MA
I play with encumbrance. When I'm a PC, I track my weight even more carefully than most GMs would expect. Encumbrance can be a deciding factor during an adventure. Carrying 50 lbs. of copper pieces may require you to think about what you're doing, when and how you're going to carry it, and make sure you can drop it quickly as needed.
|
|
That is like saying that getting shot at isn't immediate danger unless you get hit.Apples to oranges, that's an obvious threat.
If I have a gap the players can simply step over, I say "You step over a 100 chasm"
If they need to jump it because they can't simply step over it, it is because they can fall to their doom. So they need to roll dice or come up with solutions that allow them to cross the gap, because if they fail they die, and that is danger.
And they can choose to take 10 instead of dealing with the randomness of the dice. Even taking 10, they can still fail if they misjudge the DC. PCs have different Acrobatics modifiers, so one person can take 10 while another has to trust in his luck or find a different method. Your stance only holds true if ALL characters can simply 'step over' the challenge.
But it is an interpretation, and we should really make a new thread if we want to argue it. :)
New threads are boring, and I don't think we actually disagree that much.
I say if you could reasonably assume you can take 10 over the gap, I'm not mentioning it. If you can't, then it is metagaming to take out a ruler and say "Well I can take 10 over x distance..."
That is like saying that getting shot at isn't immediate danger unless you get hit.Apples to oranges, that's an obvious threat.
If I have a gap the players can simply step over, I say "You step over a 100 chasm"
If they need to jump it because they can't simply step over it, it is because they can fall to their doom. So they need to roll dice or come up with solutions that allow them to cross the gap, because if they fail they die, and that is danger.
And they can choose to take 10 instead of dealing with the randomness of the dice. Even taking 10, they can still fail if they misjudge the DC. PCs have different Acrobatics modifiers, so one person can take 10 while another has to trust in his luck or find a different method. Your stance only holds true if ALL characters can simply 'step over' the challenge.
But it is an interpretation, and we should really make a new thread if we want to argue it. :)
New threads are boring, and I don't think we actually disagree that much.
I say if you could reasonably assume you can take 10 over the gap, I'm not mentioning it. If you can't, then it is metagaming to take out a ruler and say "Well I can take 10 over x distance..."
Well PCs generally know how far they can jump. Seems like at worst you'd just flop some 10 ft. poles across the pit to see how far across it was, and then decide if you were "sure you're up to that". And if you're "sure you're up to that" then go ahead. If you're not, then you might need to figure out another way.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ciretose:
You're wrong.
I'm not an athlete, but I can easily to a standing broad jump of 5-6 feet, over and over again without fail. It doesn't matter if I'm jumping over a piece of tape on the floor or a deep pit... I can make that jump. With a running start, it's even easier. If I were an adventurer, a 5-foot-diameter pit would be a trivial obstacle. Why waste game time making everyone roll to jump over the pit? Why not let them Take 10 and get on to something relevant to the adventure that's actually a threat, like a trap, monster, or shady NPC?
Let your players Take 10 unless they're in combat or they're distracted by something other than the task at hand.
Emphasis mine.
|
|
@ciretose:
You're wrong.Emphasis mine.I'm not an athlete, but I can easily to a standing broad jump of 5-6 feet, over and over again without fail. It doesn't matter if I'm jumping over a piece of tape on the floor or a deep pit... I can make that jump. With a running start, it's even easier. If I were an adventurer, a 5-foot-diameter pit would be a trivial obstacle. Why waste game time making everyone roll to jump over the pit? Why not let them Take 10 and get on to something relevant to the adventure that's actually a threat, like a trap, monster, or shady NPC?
Let your players Take 10 unless they're in combat or they're distracted by something other than the task at hand.
As I said, 5 to 6 feet I'm just going to comment on the fact you crossed a pit of that size.
Now when it gets to be about 10 feet or so...
And to be clear, I'm saying to my players "There is a gap in front of you that you need to jump across, what do you want to do?"
If someone says "Can I take 10" I say "That is your decision, not mine. What do you want to do?"
|
|
If you've been leaving it up to your players, then your last several posts don't make much sense.
Sean described a 5 to 6 foot gap. That is a long step more than a jump. I'm not asking at that point because there is no perceived or real danger.
A significant gap is another matter altogether. There is some danger or I would be hand waving it.
If a player feels confident they can clear it, there isn't any danger. If they are correct or not is a whole other issue.
But in games I play, I'm not asking if it isn't in doubt. My players know that. I know that from the GMs I play with. So when I (or they) say that I know I better make an intelligence check about the gap. Players with high jump will feel confident if they roll well and taking 10 is going to work, all rolls are behind my screen.
Taking 10 because you know exactly how far you can jump if you take 10 is metagaming, pure and simple. A good GM doesn't create encounters that slow down the game but don't involve risk to the party.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Ciretose, I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me about INT checks and what encounters there should be, or why. All I was saying was that an action having consequences for failure (like missing a jump and falling to your death) does not preclude the option of taking 10 on that action. That's all I was getting at.
Whether the choice to T10 is metagaming or whether the encounter should have been there in the first place or anything else you started babbling about has nothing to do with anything I said.
I even tried to be clear/focused by highlighting the most relevant parts of the quote: the difference between jumping over a line and jumping over a pit doesn't affect the legality of T10, and an action doesn't count as a distraction against itself for purposes of T10.
I don't really care to discuss metagaming or INT checks. I was just pointing out what does and does not count as sufficiently distracted to prevent a PC from taking 10.
|
|
Sean described a 5 to 6 foot gap. That is a long step more than a jump. I'm not asking at that point because there is no perceived or real danger.
What if there is something that increases the DC that the players haven't noticed? Something that would make them fall if they took 10 and their bonus was too little?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is just me however. Our gaming group works pretty much like Steve Geddes's gaming group. It not so much if character A can pick one more swortsword or not, but more a matter of, does it seem plausible that this group can transport all this stuff. Usually the answer is yes, but sometimes only some stuff can be looted. Funny enough the weight is usually not the problem, but the mass. A figyter with Str 22 can easily carry 8 fullplates +1 and 8 longspears +1 worth of weight, but he can't Carry 8 fullplates +1 and 8 longspears +1.
Weight includes mass. Do seriously believe D&D has correct weight if you don't include mass? No, all items would be useless. Swords weight double the amount they should in real life.
To the OP, we use the full rules for equipment & encumbrance. With HeroLab, it's a breeze, but we ran it that way even before HeroLab.
We don't do it for the accounting. We do it because it has an impact on the game. There are tactical considerations to be made rather than "Full Speed All the Time" on unhindered acrobatics checks while carrying their body weight in loot.
The only thing that sometimes gets hand-waved is ammunition. If the PCs are anywhere close to civilization where it's reasonable that they could replenish ammunition, I tend to skip tracking it. Food often falls into this category as well.
But if they're out in the wilderness, you can bet your bottom it's all being tracked.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sean described a 5 to 6 foot gap. That is a long step more than a jump. I'm not asking at that point because there is no perceived or real danger.
A step is when you go from having two feet touching the ground, to one foot touching the ground, to two feet touching the ground.
A jump is when you go from having two feet touching the ground, to ZERO feet touching the ground, to two feet touching the ground. IOW, there is a point where neither of your feet are touching the ground. And unless you're Jean-Claude Van Damme doing the splits, there's no way a 5-6 foot gap is a "step" for a Medium creature, as that means you have one foot on the near side and the other foot on the far side. And if you tried to take a "step" like that over a gap, you'd probably find yourself stuck spread-eagled and unable to get out of that position because your center of mass is over the gap and low.
Taking 10 because you know exactly how far you can jump if you take 10 is metagaming, pure and simple.
That's just silly. I KNOW I can jump a 5-6 foot gap every single time. I can do it 50 times in a row. And I'm not even trained for it. So KNOWING that me-the-character can jump a 5-6 foot gap isn't metagaming any more than knowing I can climb a steep incline that's to difficult to just walk up (DC 0).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Taking 10 because you know exactly how far you can jump if you take 10 is metagaming, pure and simple.That's just silly. I KNOW I can jump a 5-6 foot gap every single time. I can do it 50 times in a row. And I'm not even trained for it. So KNOWING that me-the-character can jump a 5-6 foot gap isn't metagaming any more than knowing I can climb a steep incline that's to difficult to just walk up (DC 0).
Seconded. It boggles my mind to see someone accused of metagaming for their character being well aware of their own capabilities. If this was Toontown or the First World or some other place where physics is more mutable I could see it being more of a concern, but the idea that a character is not aware of their ability to do a basic, simple task given plenty of time, no distractions, and no mitigating circumstances is nothing short of bizarre.
Getting into situations outside of the obvious "Yeah I know I can do that", such as trading that 5-foot gap for a 15- or even 10-foot one, is where you get into the realm of "I'm not 100% sure about this" and the necessity for the randomness of dice rolling comes in.
A step is when you go from having two feet touching the ground, to one foot touching the ground, to two feet touching the ground.
A jump is when you go from having two feet touching the ground, to ZERO feet touching the ground, to two feet touching the ground. IOW, there is a point where neither of your feet are touching the ground. And unless you're Jean-Claude Van Damme doing the splits, there's no way a 5-6 foot gap is a "step" for a Medium creature
Awesome Sean. I totally "loled" at this (just recently saw Bloodsport, and Jean-Claude doing splits on some chairs, and I was like "Wow..." O.o). Very awesome. ^-^
EDIT:
That's just silly. I KNOW I can jump a 5-6 foot gap every single time. I can do it 50 times in a row. And I'm not even trained for it. So KNOWING that me-the-character can jump a 5-6 foot gap isn't metagaming any more than knowing I can climb a steep incline that's to difficult to just walk up (DC 0).
Also wanted to point out I think this was an awesome example. That is all. ^-^
I track it, but we tend not to sweat the small stuff too much and I only recalc in between sessions, unless, of course, something big gets hauled in and my character is the one toting it around. Once you start leaving some mundane gear on mounts or mules it gets a lot easier.
Frankly though, I love when a huge haul of loot comes into our possession and then we have to see to the business of what and how things get transported...talk about a good problem to have!
I guess, speaking for myself only, it's an example of enjoyable minutia.
My group keeps pretty close tabs on weight and encumbrance. Muleback cords are our friends. Most of the time a character has a set of those. I've put lesser versions in there for that extra little boost you need but don't want to pay for the full power set. Of course if the weights of weapons and armor and many items weren't unrealistically heavy then we wouldn't need the cords as much!
|
@ciretose:
You're wrong.Emphasis mine.I'm not an athlete, but I can easily to a standing broad jump of 5-6 feet, over and over again without fail. It doesn't matter if I'm jumping over a piece of tape on the floor or a deep pit... I can make that jump. With a running start, it's even easier. If I were an adventurer, a 5-foot-diameter pit would be a trivial obstacle. Why waste game time making everyone roll to jump over the pit? Why not let them Take 10 and get on to something relevant to the adventure that's actually a threat, like a trap, monster, or shady NPC?
Let your players Take 10 unless they're in combat or they're distracted by something other than the task at hand.
Define "deep pit" with regards to the depth Sean is talking about.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you have to define that, you've missed his point.Sorry I was thinking jumping down into the pit.
Jumping across a pit is easy but what happens when the structure around the pit becomes unstable?
If by "unstable" you mean the ground is difficult terrain or is effectively slippery (like loose gravel or something), then it takes more movement and/or adds to the DC of the jump.
If instead you mean something more like the jump is part of escaping a collapsing building before it crushes you/before all the ground is gone, then you have a clear threat/distraction outside of the jump itself and therefore can't T10.
|
|
Sean described a 5 to 6 foot gap. That is a long step more than a jump. I'm not asking at that point because there is no perceived or real danger.What if there is something that increases the DC that the players haven't noticed? Something that would make them fall if they took 10 and their bonus was too little?
This is kind of my point. As the GM I am telling them there is a gap that would be dangerous to jump across. If it weren't dangerous, I wouldn't be stopping to make it an "encounter" that could involve rolling.
There is a metagame assumption with taking 10 in a situation where failure can mean falling to your death and you are estimating the distance beyond what would be a normal "step"
I think Sean may have missed where I pointed out that we aren't talking about the simple 5 to 6 foot jump (For the record, I just measured it off and I can easily make a 6 foot "step". I'm about 6 feet tall, and technically for a moment both feet were off the ground, but still that isn't a real "jump" moment.) Hell, it is functionally a 5 foot step.
The point being, a 5 or 6 foot gap isn't even worth stopping the flow of the game other than maybe saying "You hopped across a dangerous ravine without incident." If it is plot relevant, or there is some sort of event that occurs as part of the crossing (trap, encounter, etc...).
If it is during a combat encounter, you can't take 10 because you are distracted, and unless you are really anal, I don't think there is a lot of fun to be had in "Now the group is crossing another 6 foot gap, everyone taking 10 again? Epic!"
So we are talking about the very rare event when play is stopped at the edge of a gap that is reasonably larger than the average PC could cross without incident. Say When you start getting to say, 10 to 15 feet or so. At that point it becomes more of an estimation of distance based on GM description. you are pretty much guessing at the actual distance. So when a player says "Can I take 10" they are basically saying "Is there any danger for me or can we just handwave this?"
And if you can just handwave it, why did you stop to draw it up and play it out?
So the GM's I've played with (and me when I GM) feel it is metagaming to just tell the player if they can or can't functionally handwave a check that the outcome of which could be dangerous.
So they make a check. Wisdom, Intelligence, perception , whateven makes sense to see if they think the distance is something they can easily make and there are no other factors that might come into play. If they think it is clear, they can try taking 10. If not, they can try different methods (build a bridge, drink a potion, pull out a yardstick...)
Otherwise, again, why are you stopping the flow of the game and/or drawing up a location that is handwaved away without any effort on the part of the PC?
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Anyone else feel like ciretose is having an entirely different conversation than anyone else?I'm trying to figure out why people would stop play, draw up something, and then have everyone take 10 before erasing it and moving on to the next encounter.
Let me give you a concrete example:
There's a PFS scenario with an underwater maze. Once you get to the other side (which requires a series of DC 10 swim checks), you get an item. You need to draw up the map and make an encounter of it because you need to track how long everyone's holding their breath as they navigate the maze.
So on the way in, there's nothing going on, so everyone can take 10... except that the wizard had 7 STR and no ranks in swim, so if he wanted to move through the water he had to roll. This is relevant because PCs' positions matter later when an encounter is triggered on the way back.
So you see, it was necessary to have an "encounter" (getting through the maze), but it was still appropriate for some PCs to take 10. But since positioning mattered and because only some of the PCs could succeed with a T10, you can't just handwave it.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Ah, just thought of another example:
Party is exploring an icy ruin. Moving to certain areas will trigger encounters or other events, so we're on a map and taking turns moving. Some of the ground is icy, requiring acrobatics checks to cross. People might start falling down once combat starts, so it's worth having the ice require a check, but until that actually happens, people can just take 10. Though again, there will be some PCs (like dwarven tin-cans) who will need to roll at the same time other PCs are taking 10, so it makes a difference even before the encounter(s) start.
|
|
Anyone else feel like ciretose is having an entirely different conversation than anyone else?I'm trying to figure out why people would stop play, draw up something, and then have everyone take 10 before erasing it and moving on to the next encounter.Let me give you a concrete example:
There's a PFS scenario with an underwater maze. Once you get to the other side (which requires a series of DC 10 swim checks), you get an item. You need to draw up the map and make an encounter of it because you need to track how long everyone's holding their breath as they navigate the maze.
So on the way in, there's nothing going on, so everyone can take 10... except that the wizard had 7 STR and no ranks in swim, so if he wanted to move through the water he had to roll. This is relevant because PCs' positions matter later when an encounter is triggered on the way back.
So you see, it was necessary to have an "encounter" (getting through the maze), but it was still appropriate for some PCs to take 10. But since positioning mattered and because only some of the PCs could succeed with a T10, you can't just handwave it.
Yes, and that is a completely different circumstance. No one check fail is going to end in death...well...until you get to the end and I would think each round of suffocation might be distracting...
You can take 10 climbing a rope until someone starts to shoot at you or the guy appears at the top with a knife, or whatever. But why am I stopping play to have people climb something that they can just take 10 to climb?
I'm only stopping play if something could happen. I've also played with GMs who have nothing happen just to get people to stop metagaming. I've done it myself with people who buff on the first round whenever I draw up a map.
"Roll Initiative."
"I cast barkskin!"
"A puppy comes out of the bushes and tries to lick you." (Puppy rolls a 20) "Rolling to confirm, Puppy rolls a 15 touch and licks the hell out of you. It would be adorable, but your skin is all rough and you can't feel it."
"Ok...then what."
"Nothing. Just a puppy, who is sad because you taste like a tree. You cast your barkskin for the day a few uneventful hours pass where nothing of note happens and it wears off. Stop metagaming."
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've seen it done, but it makes AoO and Flanking hard in my experience. I can see the advantages as well, but I like having the visuals.
No doubt! My descriptive talents still need honing, so I tend to only use it when I don't have time to put out a map or if the scene is unimportant. (I often have quick combats where the only relevant ranges are "in melee" and "NOT in melee") The Gamemastery flipmats help immensely in this regard, and having them and Gaming Paper rolls and singles to draw out before the game let me get right into the combat without having to break flow to sketch things.
And really, what else have I spent all that money on minis and mat aids for, if not to USE them?
Anyone else feel like ciretose is having an entirely different conversation than anyone else?I'm trying to figure out why people would stop play, draw up something, and then have everyone take 10 before erasing it and moving on to the next encounter.
I can think of quite a few reasons. Firstly (and this one is very much encumbrance based) is armor check penalties and encumbrance penalties generally mean taking 10 might not be effective even with short jumps at low levels (if you have a +2 dexteirty, taking 10 for 12, -5 for chainmail, DC 7 is the best you can do safely). EDIT: This actually mixes in later on as well, since if the area later involves the PCs in this section (such as guards arriving and combat occurring here, small pits of 5 ft. that can be effortlessly jumped over are now much scarier to low level PCs in armor or carrying lots of junk may be able to fail a DC 5 check due to their penalties).
Perhaps there is an encounter that COULD occur here later but doesn't right this moment. Perhaps the PCs can comfortably take 10 over the tiny pits coming into the dungeon, but what about on the way back out, when they're carrying some 300 lbs. of coins and treasures while they're being chased by a black pudding through the tunnel which just uses its climb speed to move across the walls while the PCs are trying to kip from ledge to ledge.
Perhaps the holes were supposed to have metal grates in them but were melted off, providing a clue as to the black pudding deeper in the dungeon. So perhaps they are not intended by the original builder as an obstacle but a convenient way of draining off rain or other liquids that run into the dungeon, and now the safety grates are missing.
Perhaps the floors are set like that by feisty little kobolds who want to be able to easily kip across the floors despite their small size while making it a nightmare for enemies to move around (for example, maybe the very lightweight and mobile kobolds literally cannot fail to jump a 5 ft. space in the ground even rolling a 1, but it prevents enemies from charging them in the tunnels).
There are plenty of reasons that you might. These are just a few of the reasons I would be likely to use myself.
|
Anyone else feel like ciretose is having an entirely different conversation than anyone else?I'm trying to figure out why people would stop play, draw up something, and then have everyone take 10 before erasing it and moving on to the next encounter.
To stop people metagaming?
Oh look! The GM has got the battlemat out! Get ready, guys!
No, I don't actually do this to my groups. But I do ask them for a d20 roll occasionally, and don't tell them why. Most of the time there isn't a reason. But if I need something like an opposed perception check, I can get one without alerting the players.
|
|
Anyone else feel like ciretose is having an entirely different conversation than anyone else?I'm trying to figure out why people would stop play, draw up something, and then have everyone take 10 before erasing it and moving on to the next encounter.To stop people metagaming?
Oh look! The GM has got the battlemat out! Get ready, guys!
No, I don't actually do this to my groups. But I do ask them for a d20 roll occasionally, and don't tell them why. Most of the time there isn't a reason. But if I need something like an opposed perception check, I can get one without alerting the players.
I ask to see players sheets and then roll dice behind the screen for no reason sometimes.
I don't like the idea of setting up a skill encounter that doesn't require anyone to do anything other than say "Take 10".
At least have them roll to see if they think they can make it easily first.
I like the idea of someone who could take 10 psyching themselves out of it because of a low roll to estimate the distance much more than four handwaves and we wait while we set up the next encounter.
|
|
Or the first one to take 10 gets snatched into the pit by the lurking harpoon spider. :)
And to bring the discussion full circle back to the topic, this is kind of my point.
I don't care about encumbrance much if you aren't trying to cheese it. If you make an honest mistake and are a little over, who cares? I don't want to slow down the game.
By the same token, I'm going to hand wave the small things until you start becoming a rules lawyer. Then there will be puppies and harpoon spiders.
I am all about being fair to the players and having the same rules on both sides of the table. But if you try to game the game, and ruin the immersion with metagaming and other such annoyances...
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am all about being fair to the players and having the same rules on both sides of the table. But if you try to game the game, and ruin the immersion with metagaming and other such annoyances...
Thing is, it isn't metagaming for a character to say 'you know, on average I can jump X ft without trying too hard. So as long as I don't rush myself I should be able to safely jump gaps around that far'.
|
|
I am all about being fair to the players and having the same rules on both sides of the table. But if you try to game the game, and ruin the immersion with metagaming and other such annoyances...Thing is, it isn't metagaming for a character to say 'you know, on average I can jump X ft without trying too hard. So as long as I don't rush myself I should be able to safely jump gaps around that far'.
But again, I'm not asking you to do the jump if everyone is sure they can make it.
Knowing I can jump 20 feet with reasonable certainty doesn't mean I can discern with certainty what they exact distance I am looking at is and ascertain any possible impediments that may complicate the jump (The launch point may give way, be slick, have a harpoon spider, etc...)
Again, I'm not talking about Sean's 5 or 6 ft jump, I'm talking more significant distances.
Similarly, I'm not going to weigh your arrows, unless you tell me you have a ridiculous number of them.
I'm not stopping the flow of the game unless there is a reason (or in the case of the puppy above, a purpose).
@ciretose:
You're wrong.Emphasis mine.I'm not an athlete, but I can easily to a standing broad jump of 5-6 feet, over and over again without fail. It doesn't matter if I'm jumping over a piece of tape on the floor or a deep pit... I can make that jump. With a running start, it's even easier. If I were an adventurer, a 5-foot-diameter pit would be a trivial obstacle. Why waste game time making everyone roll to jump over the pit? Why not let them Take 10 and get on to something relevant to the adventure that's actually a threat, like a trap, monster, or shady NPC?
Let your players Take 10 unless they're in combat or they're distracted by something other than the task at hand.
As I said, 5 to 6 feet I'm just going to comment on the fact you crossed a pit of that size.
Now when it gets to be about 10 feet or so...
10 feet or so is also a trivial jump. I'd never fail a 10 feet jump with a runing start, ever, no matter how deep is the pit. I might fail, if I'm being shot, but not just because the pit is deep. I'm quite sure that LeBron James can jump a 15 feet pit with a running start without a problem no matter how deep is the pit.
I'm going to give you an example:
There's a 10 feet pool. Can the player jump it taking a ten? Now imagine it's a 10 feet pool of contact deadly venom. Can he take ten? If the answer is not... what if the character *doesn't know* it's venom. He looks at the pool, and it looks exactly like the dirt water pool he just jumped taking ten, one minute ago, with no chance to fail. Would he need to roll?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Man this thread has gone way off the track. Kind of fun watching it though. :-)