|
Obviously if they made the Reflex save, they'd be clinging to the ledge.And yet the rules say you only have to make the save if you fail the check. You JUST SAID the PC made the check. Does this not seem contradictory to you?
I said no such thing.
Your example was a 15ft pit.
That requires a total of 20ft distance to cross, using the 5ft paradigm, or 16ft, using the 1ft paradigm.
If we're going by the latter, then yes, rolling a 17 Acrobatics would succeed, but when I was answering that question the conversation at the time was using the 5ft paradigm (of which, of course, a DC 17 would fail, and require a Reflex save to catch the ledge).
Does that make more sense now?
|
|
You don't round up or down, you simply determine which DC you met.
A 17ft jump meets the 15 DC.
You'd land 3 squares from your starting point.
If the pit you were trying to jump was 3 squares long, you'd fall in, assuming you failed your Reflex save to grab hold of the ledge.
That's the answer I've been giving consistently this whole time (when answering using the 5ft paradigm).
Rolling a 15 for your Acrobatics check gets you 3 squares of movement.
This was already confirmed by other posters up thread.
If that square happens to contain a pit, you'd fall in (assuming your failed your Reflex save).
You don't just "float" there and decide, "oh, well, I guess I'll just Air Walk another 5ft and be safe."
That doesn't cut it.
This isn't Looney Tunes.
|
I'm leaning more towards the DC 11 answer myself, after all of these examples, but regardless whether the answer is "11" or "15" both of those answers involve total distance crossed.
"10" does not.
On the contrary - that is precisely what "10" is. It's the total amount of distance you spent crossing the pit (as opposed to crossing solid ground on either side of the pit). "11" (or "15") is the total distance moved, but that's not all spent crossing the pit.
|
That's the answer I've been giving consistently this whole time (when answering using the 5ft paradigm).You don't round up or down, you simply determine which DC you met.
A 17ft jump meets the 15 DC.
You'd land 3 squares from your starting point.
If the pit you were trying to jump was 3 squares long, you'd fall in, assuming you failed your Reflex save to grab hold of the ledge.
And in this example it explicitly contradicts the rules. Why is that?
|
|
Somehow I expect you mean something different than what I would mean by that. 10' pit => distance across the pit 10' => distance spent in air 10' => DC 10.it's almost like Occam's razor really wants it to just be how much distance needs to be spent in the air or the distance across the pit.Indeed.I've mentioned this many times, but I'll repeat myself again.
I believe, just as much as you believe, that my position is "simple and straightforward", "common sense", "Occam's Razor", whatever analogy you want to use.
It's how I've been doing it for years, across game systems. To make up "floating in midair" answers breaks my understanding of physics both in-game and IRL. To follow the logic people are proposing here requires rules that are unintuitive. I look at a map, count squares, and more that much.
When people keep posting "ack, I can't believe this thread is still going", I completely agree with them. When people ask, "Isn't this common sense?", my answer is "Yes".
We're both of the same belief that our own method is correct, and for the same reasons.
An FAQ, at this point, is probably all that will settle the answer.
I agree. And I'm not saying you don't think your position is common sense or whatever.
I was just surprised to see you say "Indeed" to "DC = distance across the pit".
But I guess you think the distance across a 10' pit is 15'?It really all does come down to me looking at a 10' pit as 10' and you counting squares.
Someone else up thread (it might have been you, I forget) also looked at the distance required for a "running start" in the same way.
It's my belief you start in square 1, and need to move into both squares 2 & 3 to gain a running start.
They believed that only squares 1 & 2 were required for a running start.
Much like jumping over a pit, I think we're on different levels of understanding how movement in Pathfinder is handled.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Square to square", just like every other movement method in Pathfinder.In fact, your questions support the "+1ft" answer that is up for FAQ in this thread, and supported by SKR, because the DC would not change regardless of creature size.For that +1 ft question...
Do people measure the distance jumped from the front of the toe to the landing heel (like the Olympics)? Or do people measure from front of the toe to the front of the landing toe?
Here's something you have wrong, jumping isn't a movement method, otherwise something would have a jump speed. It's an acrobatics check you make as part of land movement to see if you succeed at clearing an obstacle. That's why when you clear a pit you're not "in any square" because you haven't finished your movement.
|
|
On the contrary - that is precisely what "10" is. It's the total amount of distance you spent crossing the pit (as opposed to crossing solid ground on either side of the pit). "11" (or "15") is the total distance moved, but that's not all spent crossing the pit.I'm leaning more towards the DC 11 answer myself, after all of these examples, but regardless whether the answer is "11" or "15" both of those answers involve total distance crossed.
"10" does not.
And, again, "total distance crossed" is what we're disagreeing on.
That's truly the question up for FAQ.
Somehow I expect you mean something different than what I would mean by that. 10' pit => distance across the pit 10' => distance spent in air 10' => DC 10.it's almost like Occam's razor really wants it to just be how much distance needs to be spent in the air or the distance across the pit.Indeed.I've mentioned this many times, but I'll repeat myself again.
I believe, just as much as you believe, that my position is "simple and straightforward", "common sense", "Occam's Razor", whatever analogy you want to use.
It's how I've been doing it for years, across game systems. To make up "floating in midair" answers breaks my understanding of physics both in-game and IRL. To follow the logic people are proposing here requires rules that are unintuitive. I look at a map, count squares, and more that much.
When people keep posting "ack, I can't believe this thread is still going", I completely agree with them. When people ask, "Isn't this common sense?", my answer is "Yes".
We're both of the same belief that our own method is correct, and for the same reasons.
An FAQ, at this point, is probably all that will settle the answer.
I agree. And I'm not saying you don't think your position is common sense or whatever.
I was just surprised to see you say "Indeed" to "DC = distance across the pit".
But I guess you think the distance across a 10' pit is 15'?It really all does come down to me looking at a 10' pit as 10' and you counting squares.
Someone else up thread (it might have been you, I forget) also looked at the distance required for a "running start" in the same way.
It's my belief you start in square 1, and need to move into both squares 2 & 3 to gain a running start.
They believed that only squares 1 & 2 were required for a running start.
Much like jumping over a pit, I think we're on different levels of understanding how movement in...
\\
So now you need 15" to get a running star? That means a 20ft jump with a running start can only be done by someone who moves at least 40 ft can do it?
This does stat a running start.
|
|
And in this example it explicitly contradicts the rules. Why is that?That's the answer I've been giving consistently this whole time (when answering using the 5ft paradigm).You don't round up or down, you simply determine which DC you met.
A 17ft jump meets the 15 DC.
You'd land 3 squares from your starting point.
If the pit you were trying to jump was 3 squares long, you'd fall in, assuming you failed your Reflex save to grab hold of the ledge.
It contradicts how you believe the rule works, since you believe the DC = Obstacle
It does not contradict how I believe rule works, since I believe the DC = Distance
You don't round up or down, you simply determine which DC you met.
A 17ft jump meets the 15 DC.
You'd land 3 squares from your starting point.
If the pit you were trying to jump was 3 squares long, you'd fall in, assuming you failed your Reflex save to grab hold of the ledge.
That's the answer I've been giving consistently this whole time (when answering using the 5ft paradigm).
Rolling a 15 for your Acrobatics check gets you 3 squares of movement.
This was already confirmed by other posters up thread.
If that square happens to contain a pit, you'd fall in (assuming your failed your Reflex save).
Nefreet, Us agreeing in your example that Rolling a 15 for Acrobatics and getting 3 squares of movement was correct was because of the way the example was. You're having something jump from their starting spot and jumping as far as they can with the roll, and then not moving any more. Thus 15ft or 3 squares. But if you're moving and needing to jump over a 15ft pit you jump the 15ft and continue your movement the rest of the 20ft. Jumping isn't it's own movement type, it's an acrobatics check done as part of movement.
|
|
Nefreet, Us agreeing in your example that Rolling a 15 for Acrobatics and getting 3 squares of movement was correct was because of the way the example was. You're having something jump from their starting spot and jumping as far as they can with the roll, and then not moving any more. Thus 15ft or 3 squares. But if you're moving and needing to jump over a 15ft pit you jump the 15ft and continue your movement the rest of the 20ft. Jumping isn't it's own movement type, it's an acrobatics check done as part of movement.You don't round up or down, you simply determine which DC you met.
A 17ft jump meets the 15 DC.
You'd land 3 squares from your starting point.
If the pit you were trying to jump was 3 squares long, you'd fall in, assuming you failed your Reflex save to grab hold of the ledge.
That's the answer I've been giving consistently this whole time (when answering using the 5ft paradigm).
Rolling a 15 for your Acrobatics check gets you 3 squares of movement.
This was already confirmed by other posters up thread.
If that square happens to contain a pit, you'd fall in (assuming your failed your Reflex save).
Why does the DC change just because an obstacle appeared?
(and if your answer involves Air Walk, I'm going to ignore it)
|
|
It does not contradict how I believe rule works, since I believe the DC = DistanceThen you contradicted yourself when you said 17 is enough to pass the DC.No, I did not. 17 was enough to land in the 3rd square.
There just happened to still be a pit in that square.
A 17ft jump meets the 15 DC.
You'd land 3 squares from your starting point.
|
|
And, again, "total distance crossed" is what we're disagreeing on.
That's truly the question up for FAQ.
This, while personally I disagree with your stance, it's not wrong and I wouldn't argue against it at a table.
This is really what the source of the issue is and what I'm hoping will be answered.
|
|
And, again, "total distance crossed" is what we're disagreeing on.
That's truly the question up for FAQ.
This, while personally I disagree with your stance, it's not wrong and I wouldn't argue against it at a table.
This is really what the source of the issue is and what I'm hoping will be answered.
True enough. I'll wait and see what the dev team thinks about it.
And in this example it explicitly contradicts the rules. Why is that?That's the answer I've been giving consistently this whole time (when answering using the 5ft paradigm).You don't round up or down, you simply determine which DC you met.
A 17ft jump meets the 15 DC.
You'd land 3 squares from your starting point.
If the pit you were trying to jump was 3 squares long, you'd fall in, assuming you failed your Reflex save to grab hold of the ledge.
It contradicts how you believe the rule works, since you believe the DC = Obstacle
It does not contradict how I believe rule works, since I believe the DC = Distance
Nefreet, please stop misrepresenting our stance. It's not very pleasant, it causes more confusion, and it shows you're not trying to understand our position (regardless of if you actually are or not).
We both believe the DC = The distance to be crossed. I don't know if you've ever once summed up our position by saying this, but we've never said otherwise.We believe that you only need to cross the actual distance of the "obstacle" needing to be crossed, since the obstacle is what you're crossing.
You believe that the distance to be crossed is not the distance of the obstacle in the way that you need to cross, but that the distance needed cross is the distance to move to the square after the obstacle that you needed to cross.
|
|
It does not contradict how I believe rule works, since I believe the DC = DistanceThen you contradicted yourself when you said 17 is enough to pass the DC.No, I did not. 17 was enough to land in the 3rd square.
There just happened to still be a pit in that square.
A 17ft jump meets the 15 DC.
You'd land 3 squares from your starting point.
Steven, I don't know how else I can phrase this, but those statements do not contradict one another.
|
|
And in this example it explicitly contradicts the rules. Why is that?That's the answer I've been giving consistently this whole time (when answering using the 5ft paradigm).You don't round up or down, you simply determine which DC you met.
A 17ft jump meets the 15 DC.
You'd land 3 squares from your starting point.
If the pit you were trying to jump was 3 squares long, you'd fall in, assuming you failed your Reflex save to grab hold of the ledge.
It contradicts how you believe the rule works, since you believe the DC = Obstacle
It does not contradict how I believe rule works, since I believe the DC = Distance
Nefreet, please stop misrepresenting our stance. It's not very pleasant, it causes more confusion, and it shows you're not trying to understand our position (regardless of if you actually are or not).
We both believe the DC = The distance to be crossed. I don't know if you've ever once summed up our position by saying this, but we've never said otherwise.
We believe that you only need to cross the actual distance of the "obstacle" needing to be crossed, since the obstacle is what you're crossing.
You believe that the distance to be crossed is not the distance of the obstacle in the way that you need to cross, but that the distance needed cross is the distance to move to the square after the obstacle that you needed to cross.
Hilariously, much like you believe I'm misrepresenting your argument, I believe you are misrepresenting mine.
Are we both not listening to each other?
Nefreet, Us agreeing in your example that Rolling a 15 for Acrobatics and getting 3 squares of movement was correct was because of the way the example was. You're having something jump from their starting spot and jumping as far as they can with the roll, and then not moving any more. Thus 15ft or 3 squares. But if you're moving and needing to jump over a 15ft pit you jump the 15ft and continue your movement the rest of the 20ft. Jumping isn't it's own movement type, it's an acrobatics check done as part of movement.You don't round up or down, you simply determine which DC you met.
A 17ft jump meets the 15 DC.
You'd land 3 squares from your starting point.
If the pit you were trying to jump was 3 squares long, you'd fall in, assuming you failed your Reflex save to grab hold of the ledge.
That's the answer I've been giving consistently this whole time (when answering using the 5ft paradigm).
Rolling a 15 for your Acrobatics check gets you 3 squares of movement.
This was already confirmed by other posters up thread.
If that square happens to contain a pit, you'd fall in (assuming your failed your Reflex save).
Why does the DC change just because an obstacle appeared?
(and if your answer involves Air Walk, I'm going to ignore it)
The DC doesn't change, hasn't changed, and wont change. What makes you think that a DC was changed?
Here is your view:
I want to move 20ft, so I must jump all 20 of the feet.
here's our view:
I want to move 20ft, I'm going to jump a part of that and finish the rest normally.
Now we agreed that if we try to move only using our jump check that we'd move 15ft which is 3 squares away.
What we don't agree on is that if you're moving 20ft in your turn it has to all be done by the jump, we say that you can jump ANY 15ft of that movement, start your jump at ft0, ft1, ft2, ft3, ft4 or ft5, it doesn't matter, you're still able to travel the 20ft of movement you wanted to do. Jumping isn't it's own movespeed, it's making a check as part of normal movement.
|
|
Steven, I don't know how else I can phrase this, but those statements do not contradict one another.You can phrase it "A 17ft jump meets the 15 DC to move three squares."
While in my view a 17 DC is enough to jump 17 ft into the 4th square.
"The result of your Acrobatics check indicates the distance traveled in the jump".
If you only rolled a 17, that is not enough to make it to the 4th square.
You'd land in the 3rd square. If that square contained a pit, you'd fall in (if you failed your Reflex save).
Do you see anything wrong with the logic that it is harder for a larger creature to jump a chasm than a smaller creature?A medium creature would need a DC 25 to jump a 20 ft chasm.A DC 25 to travel 25ft of distance, yes.
A large creature would need a DC 30 to jump a 20 ft chasm.
A huge creature would need a DC 35 to jump a 20 ft chasm.The answers to those examples would align with distance traveled, yes, assuming a Large+ creature needed to land in all of its squares.
Assuming the larger creature needs more distance, no, I see nothing wrong with that.
Does it not seem important that if the DC was intended to be higher for a larger creature that that ought to have been mentioned in the rules? Or how about the DC for a tiny creature? Since 4 tiny creatures can fit in a 5x5 (or each in a 2.5 x 2.5) would that mean to clear a 5' pit a tiny creature needs a 7.5 to clear it?
Both of those seem like a rather large hole to be missing from the rules if that was intended.
Can you find me anywhere else in the rules that suggest certain types of creatures or sizes of creatures get a different DC? Now some creatures get bonuses because of size (tiny get +8 to stealth for example) but no where does the DC actually change.
Creatures get a penalty on something like sense motive when they are of different races - but the base DC is, again, unchanged.
In all instances I am aware of, if the devs wants something to be harder or easier, they give a circumstantial/racial/size/whatever modifier to the creature, rather than stating that the DC changes. But absent is any rule that large creatures take a -5 penalty to jump horizontal distances (which would be a rather weird rule that only applies to certain types of jumping).
So what square do I land in if I get a 4?
And in this example it explicitly contradicts the rules. Why is that?That's the answer I've been giving consistently this whole time (when answering using the 5ft paradigm).You don't round up or down, you simply determine which DC you met.
A 17ft jump meets the 15 DC.
You'd land 3 squares from your starting point.
If the pit you were trying to jump was 3 squares long, you'd fall in, assuming you failed your Reflex save to grab hold of the ledge.
It contradicts how you believe the rule works, since you believe the DC = Obstacle
It does not contradict how I believe rule works, since I believe the DC = Distance
Nefreet, please stop misrepresenting our stance. It's not very pleasant, it causes more confusion, and it shows you're not trying to understand our position (regardless of if you actually are or not).
We both believe the DC = The distance to be crossed. I don't know if you've ever once summed up our position by saying this, but we've never said otherwise.
We believe that you only need to cross the actual distance of the "obstacle" needing to be crossed, since the obstacle is what you're crossing.
You believe that the distance to be crossed is not the distance of the obstacle in the way that you need to cross, but that the distance needed cross is the distance to move to the square after the obstacle that you needed to cross.Hilariously, much like you believe I'm misrepresenting your argument, I believe you are misrepresenting mine.
Are we both not listening to each other?
What part of my summation of your side was incorrect?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On the "distance crossed" thing: this could be interpreted two ways. One is the same as "distance travelled" and is the one Nefreet is espousing and would require you to exceed the width of the pit to fully get to the other side. The other is more akin to "distance bypassed" or the like as in "I crossed the 10' pit". I believe both are valid readings of the English, but personally read it as the latter.
Don't want people getting too caught up on something that isn't likely to be conclusive.
|
Nefreet, Us agreeing in your example that Rolling a 15 for Acrobatics and getting 3 squares of movement was correct was because of the way the example was. You're having something jump from their starting spot and jumping as far as they can with the roll, and then not moving any more. Thus 15ft or 3 squares. But if you're moving and needing to jump over a 15ft pit you jump the 15ft and continue your movement the rest of the 20ft. Jumping isn't it's own movement type, it's an acrobatics check done as part of movement.You don't round up or down, you simply determine which DC you met.
A 17ft jump meets the 15 DC.
You'd land 3 squares from your starting point.
If the pit you were trying to jump was 3 squares long, you'd fall in, assuming you failed your Reflex save to grab hold of the ledge.
That's the answer I've been giving consistently this whole time (when answering using the 5ft paradigm).
Rolling a 15 for your Acrobatics check gets you 3 squares of movement.
This was already confirmed by other posters up thread.
If that square happens to contain a pit, you'd fall in (assuming your failed your Reflex save).
Why does the DC change just because an obstacle appeared?
(and if your answer involves Air Walk, I'm going to ignore it)
The DC doesn't change because the obstacle appeared, your movement does. With a few steps, olympian A can move 5 squares with his DC 20 check and clear the four squares in between.
Can you please present an example using a pit that is off grid?
|
|
Do you see anything wrong with the logic that it is harder for a larger creature to jump a chasm than a smaller creature?A medium creature would need a DC 25 to jump a 20 ft chasm.A DC 25 to travel 25ft of distance, yes.
A large creature would need a DC 30 to jump a 20 ft chasm.
A huge creature would need a DC 35 to jump a 20 ft chasm.The answers to those examples would align with distance traveled, yes, assuming a Large+ creature needed to land in all of its squares.
Assuming the larger creature needs more distance, no, I see nothing wrong with that.
Does it not seem important that if the DC was intended to be higher for a larger creature that that ought to have been mentioned in the rules? Or how about the DC for a tiny creature? Since 4 tiny creatures can fit in a 5x5 (or each in a 2.5 x 2.5) would that mean to clear a 5' pit a tiny creature needs a 7.5 to clear it?
Both of those seem like a rather large hole to be missing from the rules if that was intended.
Can you find me anywhere else in the rules that suggest certain types of creatures or sizes of creatures get a different DC? Now some creatures get bonuses because of size (tiny get +8 to stealth for example) but no where does the DC actually change.
Creatures get a penalty on something like sense motive when they are of different races - but the base DC is, again, unchanged.
In all instances I am aware of, if the devs wants something to be harder or easier, they give a circumstantial/racial/size/whatever modifier to the creature, rather than stating that the DC changes. But absent is any rule that large creatures take a -5 penalty to jump horizontal distances (which would be a rather weird rule that only applies to certain types of jumping).
You cut off the rest of my comment, which I believe addresses the concerns you're raising.
Steven, I don't know how else I can phrase this, but those statements do not contradict one another.You can phrase it "A 17ft jump meets the 15 DC to move three squares."
While in my view a 17 DC is enough to jump 17 ft into the 4th square.
"The result of your Acrobatics check indicates the distance traveled in the jump".
If you only rolled a 17, that is not enough to make it to the 4th square.
You'd land in the 3rd square. If that square contained a pit, you'd fall in (if you failed your Reflex save).
This would present a rather odd way to phrase the rule. Wouldn't it have made more sense to simply say, for every 5 you roll you clear 5' of distance. (Not that the rules don't phrase things confusingly at times...). Or maybe, in order to jump over something 5' wide you need to roll a 10 or higher. For every additional 5 points your roll is above 10 you can clear another 5'?
you don't "land" in any squareAnd that just blows my mind as an explanation.
As someone else said up thread, Pathfinder isn't Looney Tunes. Jumping a pit shouldn't be like Wile E Coyote.
I don't like the DC 11 because it's convaluted. if you were halfway off the ledge and teleported forward 10 feet over the pit, you'd end up half way on the ledge on the other side, for anyone fighting the "Realistic" angle.
You cut off the rest of my comment, which I believe addresses the concerns you're raising.
The rest of your comment was essentially admitting to being unsure how the rule should work with larger creatures.
EDIT: But here it is if you feel it is needed to accurately represent you to other readers.
Of that requirement, I am not sure. Large creatures can squeeze in a 5ft space, and Huge creatures can squeeze in 10ft. I am unsure how that would impact their ability to land a jump.But that's a separate question being asked, and has no relevance to the one we're discussing here. It also involves the question of how small of a pit a creature can simply walk over. If a Human walks over a square with a 1ft pit, I don't think anyone would require an Acrobatics check to avoid it. Same goes for a Huge creature walking over a 5ft pit.
I should note that I don't believe it is a separate issue. If the DC is X (for whatever reason) it needs to be X for all creatures regardless of size, race, etc. OR if it is different, then a final FAQ answer should cover those differences.
EDIT2: But since you ignored the important points of my post, I'll ask it again: Can you find me anywhere else in the rules that suggest certain types of creatures or sizes of creatures get a different DC?
The base DC to make a jump is equal to the distance to be crossed
For a running jump, the result of your Acrobatics check indicates the distance traveled in the jump
Action: None. An Acrobatics check is made as part of another action.
Move: The simplest move action is moving your speed.
So I am moving my speed to move 30ft away. I have an ability to always have a running jump. In my movement I can make an acrobatics check to jump. The result is how far I traveled in the jump, anything that is left after I subtract my jump from my movement is moved normally. I don't have to move squares as jumping, as it's not a movement type nor is it an movement action I'm taking, it's being done as part of the movement for my move my speed move action.
For what it's worth, I also believe you need two squares for a running start.
same, i think we're closer to what the issue is here.
|
|
For what it's worth, I also believe you need two squares for a running start.same, i think we're closer to what the issue is here.
I base my opinion off of this.
You must move before your attack, not after. You must move at least 10 feet (2 squares) and may move up to double your speed directly toward the designated opponent.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can you please present an example using a pit that is off grid?
Absolutely!!
Again, and according to the skill description for Acrobatics, "the result of your Acrobatics check indicates the distance traveled in the jump".
Distance traveled, not the distance of the obstacle.
You're walking down a perfectly blank flipmat and encounter a crevasse. After using surveying equipment, you determine this grid-less obstacle is 10ft across (to be consistent with the question up for FAQ).
There are three possible DCs you should be aiming for:
- 10: The pit is 10 feet. I jump 10 feet. DC 10 I clear the pit.
- 11: The pit is 10 feet. To cross it I have to jump a greater distance than 10 feet. Therefore 11 feet must be jumped. DC 11 I clear the pit.
- 15: The pit is 10 feet. In order to cross the pit (2 squares wide) I must jump from my square to a square 3 squares away. 3 squares is 15 feet. Therefore 15 feet must be jumped. DC 15 I clear the pit.
Since "the result of your Acrobatics check indicates the distance traveled in the jump", a result of 10 simply won't be enough to jump over the obstacle and have enough room to land.
11 would suffice if you are operating using the 1ft paradigm.
And 15 would suffice if you are operating using the 5ft paradigm.
Although for most of this discussion my answers have involved 5ft increments, I'm open to accepting that 11 is suffice enough, for total distance traveled.
But 10 is right out.
|
|
You cut off the rest of my comment, which I believe addresses the concerns you're raising.The rest of your comment was essentially admitting to being unsure how the rule should work with larger creatures.
EDIT: But here it is if you feel it is needed to accurately represent you to other readers.
Of that requirement, I am not sure. Large creatures can squeeze in a 5ft space, and Huge creatures can squeeze in 10ft. I am unsure how that would impact their ability to land a jump.But that's a separate question being asked, and has no relevance to the one we're discussing here. It also involves the question of how small of a pit a creature can simply walk over. If a Human walks over a square with a 1ft pit, I don't think anyone would require an Acrobatics check to avoid it. Same goes for a Huge creature walking over a 5ft pit.
I should note that I don't believe it is a separate issue. If the DC is X (for whatever reason) it needs to be X for all creatures regardless of size, race, etc. OR if it is different, then a final FAQ answer should cover those differences.
EDIT2: But since you ignored the important points of my post, I'll ask it again: Can you find me anywhere else in the rules that suggest certain types of creatures or sizes of creatures get a different DC?
My apologies, I had thought you were quoting another one of my comments where I did address that question directly.
If you operate using the 1ft paradigm, the DC does not change regardless of creature size. Whether you're tiny, small, large, huge, or colossal, it would require a DC 11 to clear a 10ft pit, including the 1ft landing, for a total distance of 11ft traveled.
|
|
You forgot "in the jump". The jump does not encompass all of your movement for the round.Again, and according to the skill description for Acrobatics, "the result of your Acrobatics check indicates the distance traveled in the jump".
Distance traveled, not the distance of the obstacle.
But that *is* the distance where you land.
you don't "land" in any squareAnd that just blows my mind as an explanation.
As someone else said up thread, Pathfinder isn't Looney Tunes. Jumping a pit shouldn't be like Wile E Coyote.
I don't like the DC 11 because it's convaluted. if you were halfway off the ledge and teleported forward 10 feet over the pit, you'd end up half way on the ledge on the other side, for anyone fighting the "Realistic" angle.
I just want a reply to this.