I believe I know the answer, but want to ask others, first.What's your answer?If I'm beginning to understand this all, the gap in between the two pits should be sufficient to clear the second pit.
I say this because you essentially "land" in the square containing a pit , and thus you have two remaining open squares with which to move in to and count as your required 10ft of movement to jump the second pit.
The way I see it, you deal with distance as just plain distance while characters are moving, and realign them with the grid when they stop moving (and at points where an exact position in the grid is called for by another rule). There's no need to deal with the concept of squares every step of the way.
You didn't specify how the pits align to the grid in your scenario, so ignoring the grid is actually the only thing we can do to "solve" it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This means the second part of text is wrong. A result of 15 does not reflect how far I have 'traveled' as it suggests. According to the FAQ a result of 15 reflects how far I have 'cleared'. I have 'traveled' 17 feet (from jumping to landing with feet first and the rest of body following) and have 'cleared' 15 feet (of open pit). So this second part of text needs to be rewritten, removed, or just flat out ignored.
A Pathfinder Jump starts at a specific point, which can be right at the very edge of a pit. It can end at the far edge of the pit. During such a Jump you Travel the length of the pit. Additional travel immediately before or after this movement is not part of the Jump.
|
Although, I have a new question that involves this FAQ and requiring a running start.
Imagine two 10ft pits, with a 10ft space of flat ground between them.
You get your running start and clear the first pit.
Do you have enough space to get a running start to clear the second pit?
Yes, I believe you do.
I assume the initial running start covers any jump the character makes.
I would not rule that way -- take a look at how Triple-jump competitions work. Each subsequent jump is shorter.
In real life, it would depend on how easily you can make a jump. The kind of jump that's just a big stride wouldn't diminish the runners speed by much. The kind of jump where you have to really give it all, with a landing that has you struggling to keep from falling backward, that'll stop you in your tracks.
once again the boundary between squares is an actual space that a character can "occupy", they jump at the boundary between pit and square, land on the boundary between pit and square keep running for 10 more feet and then jump again at the boundary and land again at the boundary.
|
Imagine two 10ft pits, with a 10ft space of flat ground between them.
You get your running start and clear the first pit.
Do you have enough space to get a running start to clear the second pit?
Yes, I believe you do.
I assume the initial running start covers any jump the character makes.I would not rule that way -- take a look at how Triple-jump competitions work. Each subsequent jump is shorter.
Cool.
I think I'm beginning to get the hang of this.
ignoring the grid is actually the only thing we can do to "solve" it.
just pretend for the purposes of the pit the grid is pulled back 2.5 feet and it all works out perfectly.
So, the acrobatics skill says that jumping distance can't exceed your maximum movement per round. Does this mean 30, 60 (hustle), or 120 (run) feet?
No. You've added a word there.
So, the acrobatics skill says that jumpingdistancecan't exceed your maximum movement per round. Does this mean 30, 60 (hustle), or 120 (run) feet?
What the PRD actually says.
No jump can allow you to exceed your maximum movement for the round.
I feel like I'm talking to walls.
i'm serious though, under your initial system moving the grid back 2.5 feet the DC would have been DC10 since your just jumping over a single square.
|
At the beginning of your turn, you start moving from the center of your square, but don't necessarily jump from the center of your square. This is how I reason that you need 2 squares beyond your initial square for a running start for the first jump.
You are already moving when you get land on the other side, so you can use the landing square for your running start. I would allow a character to have a running start for the second jump.
At the beginning of your turn, you start moving from the center of your square, but don't necessarily jump from the center of your square. This is how I reason that you need 2 squares beyond your initial square for a running start for the first jump.
You are already moving when you get land on the other side, so you can use the landing square for your running start. I would allow a character to have a running start for the second jump.
This strikes me as very similar to the argument that required a dc15 to cross a 10 ft pit and should be answered following the same logic.
You are only required to have 10ft of open space to get a running start. You can start in any portion of the starting square. You do not have to start in the middle of your square.
|
|
At the beginning of your turn, you start moving from the center of your square, but don't necessarily jump from the center of your square. This is how I reason that you need 2 squares beyond your initial square for a running start for the first jump.
You are already moving when you get land on the other side, so you can use the landing square for your running start. I would allow a character to have a running start for the second jump.
This strikes me as very similar to the argument that required a dc15 to cross a 10 ft pit and should be answered following the same logic.
You are only required to have 10ft of open space to get a running start. You can start in any portion of the starting square. You do not have to start in the middle of your square.
Do you not require 10ft of movement for a running start?
No. The rules state only that you have "10ft of space to get a running start".
Really. And we had a good FAQ for our trouble, too. That raised some more questions, so we're trying to get another FAQ, but there's some worry that PDT won't respect us. But really, who doesn't like a FAQ every now and then?
I've done debate for many years, Philosophy and Logic were some of my favorite college courses, and it just frustrates me to no end when people I'm trying to have a civil debate with resort to using fallacies to support their arguments (or attack those they're arguing with).
Not everyone understands proper debate, and so those sorts of tactics actually do work on the casual reader. It puts the person they're debating with on the defensive, since now they have to not only tackle the other argument, but defend their own credibility as well.
But you see, Nefreet, we're *NOT* doing a "proper debate" here, we are having a friendly informal discussion of the rules.
And many of those "logical fallacies" are perfectly OK outside a formal debate setting.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And many of those "logical fallacies" are perfectly OK outside a formal debate setting.
I'm not sure why you're crusading against this particular notion, but no these informal fallacies are NOT okay. The reason why is that their stated arguments do not support their stated conclusions.
An ad hominem is NOT okay because it is saying "this argument is wrong because this person said it". If I said "The sky is not blue because DrDeth said it was blue, and he is always wrong", that would be an ad hominem fallacy, and my statement would be wrong. (Unless of course DrDeth was in fact always wrong, but I feel confident in saying that this is NOT a universal truth. ;)
An argument from authority is NOT okay because it is saying "this authority said it, so it is true". Jason Bulmahn might say "caster/martial disparity is a myth propagated by people with agendas", but that doesn't make what he said true. (He might have evidence and reasoning to back up that statement, but THAT is what makes it true, not that he said it.) At the same time, Mark Seifter saying "this is how Acrobatics DCs are supposed to work" is an authority speaking on a subject, but it's not an argument from authority because he is backing it up with the actual people that wrote how it is supposed to work.
And now that I've wasted all of our time refuting your post, we can go back to arguing minutia.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are people just talking on this thread to get it to 1000 posts?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are people just talking on this thread to get it to 1000 posts?
...
yes
All that means is that you have to pay for all the movement you use. You can't make the jump if you can't afford the movement.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Man you guys are slowing down, only 17 New posts since this morning, here let me throw another Rogue on the fire :-)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like I'm talking to walls.
That is because you failed your Acrobatics check. The walls are the walls of the pit you fell into. :-)
/cevah
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Both are correct words. Minutia is singular, minutiae is plural. The singular doesn't work in the sentence you wrote.
And for the record, I'm only posting this so I can amuse myself with the conclusion that we're discussing minutiae and have that mean two things at once.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just lost like 3 hours of sleep on this stupid thread.
...
Worth it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is an faq on this that says the dc is 10.
We know. This is the thread that caused that FAQ. We're now discussing implications, inferences, and incongruities. Y'know. Minutiae.
I'm just gonna go with using the width of what is being jumped as the DC.
Simple.
I used to say you had to account for extra distance, but frankly that just complicates things, check this out:
10 foot pit: DC 10
15 foot chasm: DC 15
Big fat lady (5ft): DC 5
Just take the distance, and use that as a DC. Nice and simple.
Wow though, this thread is just going and going and going...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is an faq on this that says the dc is 10.
*facedesk*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1000th poster! Come back! You're going to miss it!
Which is what? 120 feet? Can you jump while running?So, the acrobatics skill says that jumping distance can't exceed your maximum movement per round. Does this mean 30, 60 (hustle), or 120 (run) feet?No. You've added a word there.
So, the acrobatics skill says that jumpingdistancecan't exceed your maximum movement per round. Does this mean 30, 60 (hustle), or 120 (run) feet?What the PRD actually says.
No jump can allow you to exceed your maximum movement for the round.
Your response shows you are still thinking the distance you can jump is capped by your max speed. (Which while generally is true, it is not because that is what the rules say, but because few people could make a DC 60+ jump check).
What I'm saying is just because your movement speed is 30 (or 60, or whatever) does not mean you cannot jump a distance farther than that - the rules are silent on whether you can do that or not.
To look at it another way. If I have 60' of movement, and spend the first 55' of movement moving up to the edge of a 15' pit, all the rules say is that by jumping I cannot move a distance of 70' (55 + 15 foot gap) during my move. They do not say I cannot begin my jump and cross the first 5' at the very end of my turn - then continue the other 10 as the beginning of my next turn.
Though I know some people get hung up on the 'floating in air' while everyone else takes their turn that this causes - I don't have a problem visualizing how it actually would flow in real time. And while pathfinder physics are not perfect, and sometime the rules explicitly break physics, where they do not I personally prefer to have things make sense, where possible, with how the real world works - and not apply arbitrary limitations due to rules abstractions (like turn based movement).
If then a player could make a given jump during his normal movement, why not allow him to split that same jump over two turns? And if we can split it over two turns, why not allow a character who has actually gotten to that 60+ acrobatics skill do something a little more miraculous and jump an 80' gap (over two turns) even though his double move only allows him 60 per turn.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
the only issue is that then that character is floating in the air for the enemies turn, so they can't reach them. :/
Only if they have no ranged/reach options.
Conversely its also a risk for the jumper if an enemy goes and stands in their intended landing spot - it would require another acrobatics check to move through an enemy space to move into a safe spot - or be blocked by the enemy and fall into the pit (though I'd allow the normal ref save as though they'd missed by 4 or less).
|
|
That's no different from having, say, decided to swim across a river. An enemy would have to move to get to them (and maybe make a swim check), as would any enemies waiting on the far side of the river; nobody is close enough to get a full-round attack.
If you can take multiple rounds to swim across a river, I don't see why you can't take multiple rounds to jump across a canyon (assuming a high enough acrobatics roll). The only real difference is that you can't alter your direction in the jump; once you've taken off, you're going to keep moving until you either make it across the gap or smack ignominiously into the canyon wall (or until a giant eagle swoops down and carries you off ...).
Your response shows you are still thinking the distance you can jump is capped by your max speed. (Which while generally is true, it is not because that is what the rules say, but because few people could make a DC 60+ jump check).
No jump can allow you to exceed your maximum movement for the round
Thats what limits it: probably to prevent an encumbered character from becomming a kangaroo to pick up speed.
If the jumper can end the turn in mid-air, the enemy can jump after him as a move action, then hit him in mid-air as a standard action, then complete his own jump next round.
I'm sure no-one will disagree with me on this.
Your response shows you are still thinking the distance you can jump is capped by your max speed. (Which while generally is true, it is not because that is what the rules say, but because few people could make a DC 60+ jump check).No jump can allow you to exceed your maximum movement for the round
Thats what limits it: probably to prevent an encumbered character from becomming a kangaroo to pick up speed.
Yes, to which I respond again:
If I have 60' of movement, and spend the first 55' of movement moving up to the edge of a 15' pit, all the rules say is that by jumping I cannot move a distance of 70' (55 + 15 foot gap) during my move. They do not say I cannot begin my jump and cross the first 5' at the very end of my turn - then continue the other 10 as the beginning of my next turn.
Your maximum movement for the round is something you decide, to some degree:
Running, with the Run feat=150 feet for a normal/medium character.
Gear and class can add to that.
You ain't rolling that high, my friend, no way.
You could double move.
You could attack and then move...
If you don't run, your maximum movement may be as low as 5 ft (Merfolk on land?)
There is a range of movement speeds.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the jumper can end the turn in mid-air, the enemy can jump after him as a move action, then hit him in mid-air as a standard action, then complete his own jump next round.
I'm sure no-one will disagree with me on this.
ooooooh boy
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
1000!
YES, I WIN THE THREAD
from my authoritative position, I declare the DC to cross any pit is 42, if you fail you burst into flames at the spot, if you succeed you teleport across the pit.