| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But the DC to jump a 5' pit is 5 AND the movement of a skill check of 5 is 5'. Both things cannot exist at the same time. There is no question that the rules were written that way and were not compatible.The rules do not say where the jump is measured from. They say that the DC of the jump is equal to the length of the jump. And since unopposed skill checks are meet or exceed rather than exceed, the jump is clearly not measured where you suppose it is.
You can either keep using your logic that is proven to not work, or you can use the logic that does work and is confirmed in the FAQ.
You keep saying that, but that is not ALL that the rules say, which is the problem. The rules ALSO say that the result of the roll, (5 in the example) is the distance traveled. The distance traveled AND the distance cleared cannot be the same thing.
The base DC to make a jump is equal to the distance to be crossed...
and
For a running jump, the result of your Acrobatics check indicates the distance traveled in the jump...Halve this result for a standing long jump to determine where you land.
So again, if the gap/DC is 5, and the result of the skill check is 5, by the first quote, you make it. By the second quote (found in the same paragraph) you fail to make it as you land 5' from your starting position, AKA in the hole.
Paizo agreed that these statements conflict, hence the FAQ. I think EVERYONE agrees that the DC should be 5. A slight rewording of the second quote would fix everything.
So again, if the gap/DC is 5, and the result of the skill check is 5, by the first quote, you make it. By the second quote (found in the same paragraph) you fail to make it as you land 5' from your starting position, AKA in the hole.
While it can be read that way it does not HAVE to be read that way. You are assuming that the distance traveled and the distance jumped are the same: something that a dc 5 jump check on the chart should have precluded.
Right, so if the distance traveled in the jump is 5', you don't clear a 5' pit. You fall in. If you CLEAR 5', your distance traveled in the jump has to be more than 5'.
This is what is known as edge-to-edge measurement. If your toes start at the edge of a 5' pit, and you travel 5', you fall in. Your toes will just touch the other side of the pit. There is NO way around that. If you land, 5' away from where you started, you fall in. You have to travel the distance of the pit + the distance that your feet need to be on the other side to land. This might be as little as 1", but it is a measurable number greater than 0.
If a bridge crosses a 5' pit that bridge MUST be longer than 5'. If it were 5' it would fit IN the pit. The bridge MUST rest on both sides of the pit. So do your feet.
Draw a line. Draw another line 5' away. Stand with your toes on the second line and first line behind you. Have a friend stand with their heels on the same line, but on the other side, facing away from you. Notice that you both have moved different distances. You LAND(ed) 5' from where you started. Your friend LAND(ed) 5' plus the length of their foot/shoe from where he started.
LAND(ed) is the term used in the rule.
You fell in. Your friend is safe.
I am all about measurements in real life. I know why the tip of a tape measure moves. I measure from center-to-center, from edge-to-edge, from edge-to-center all the time. I have made parts for aerospace engineering and for military machinery. I use lasers, calipers, and micrometers to measure. I work to the thousandth of in inch, daily.
Again, I think we all agree the DC should be 5. Just that the wording isn't right.
I understand that measurements, while they seem simple, can be confusing. I see it all the time. It is a lot like percentages. Like how 100% markup only equals a 50% profit margin. And how a 50% markup equals a 33% profit margin. But if you sell two widgets at 33% margin it equals the same profit as 1 of the same widget at 50% margin. But 2 @ 33% is not intuitively the same as 1 @ 50%. Confusing, yet accurate.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So again, if the gap/DC is 5, and the result of the skill check is 5, by the first quote, you make it. By the second quote (found in the same paragraph) you fail to make it as you land 5' from your starting position, AKA in the hole.While it can be read that way it does not HAVE to be read that way. You are assuming that the distance traveled and the distance jumped are the same: something that a dc 5 jump check on the chart should have precluded.
This is incorrect. If you land 5' away, you land in the next square. You can never land 2 squares away if you land 5' away. if that first square is a hole, and you land 5' away, you land in that square, and fall in the whole.
There is no other correct reading of that line.
There is another correct interpretation of what that line SHOULD mean. But it is not what that line states.
This is what is known as edge-to-edge measurement. If your toes start at the edge of a 5' pit, and you travel 5', you fall in.
his is what is known as edge-to-edge measurement. If your toes start at the edge of a 5' pit, and you travel 5', you fall in. Your toes will just touch the other side of the pit. There is NO way around that.
Its very easy to go around that, you don't switch back and forth between treating a character like a 3 dimensional being with an anatomy and treating them like a euclidean dot on a line just to find a "contradiction" in the rules.
If the character is a euclidean dot they move 5 feet and have gone from one line to the other and are fine
If the character is a creature with an anatomy they put their heel at the edge of the cliff they're leaving jump 5 feet in the air and put their toes on the far side and are also fine. Distanced moved and distanced moved in the jump don't have to be the same thing.
Reading one sentence of the rules, in isolation, with the assumption that the rules and ones understanding of them are both perfectly clear and non contradictory are going to get you some wonky results. If something could be read one way or another, look for other bits of evidence rather than trying to apply Aristotelian logic because that doesn't work.
LOL, it doesn't have anything to do with the center of a square.
Distances are not measured that way in pathfinder, ever. If they were, you could stand in the edge of a square, jump 5' and be two squares away with 5' of movement.
It doesn't work that way.
And beyond that, we all ignore that part of the rule anyway. Otherwise, it would be almost impossible to jump a 5' pit onto a 5' landing with another 5' pit on the other side. Even if you had an acrobatics of 1 and took 10, you would land 11' from where you started. That would put you in the second hole.
The line just needs to be removed completely.
Neither anything i've said or any of your refutations of.. mostly things i didn't say warrant the "LOL".
And beyond that, we all ignore that part of the rule anyway. Otherwise, it would be almost impossible to jump a 5' pit onto a 5' landing with another 5' pit on the other side.
Reading the rule the right way, and doing that as 2 5 foot jumps, with a DC of 5 is not "ignoring the rules". Your misinterpretation of the rules is not the rules, especially when I just pointed out the inconsistency in how you arrived at that conclusion. Treating the creature as either a euclidean dot or a creature with anatomy will get you a viable conclusion. You created the "inconsistency in the rules" when you switched between the two mid argument.
guys. When longjumping the distance traveled for the jump and the distance cleared are both the same thing.
Also, for those that think it's not clear/ contradictory, HOW would you want it rewritten to be clear to you?
Draw a line. Draw another line 5' away. Stand with your toes on the second line and first line behind you. Have a friend stand with their heels on the same line, but on the other side, facing away from you. Notice that you both have moved different distances. You LAND(ed) 5' from where you started. Your friend LAND(ed) 5' plus the length of their foot/shoe from where he started.
This isn't how jumps are measured in the real world.
In jumping competitions, a jump is measured from the mark (where you try to plant your toe) to the furthest back body part at landing. So, if you land and your hand makes contact with the ground behind your feet, the jump is measured up to where your hand makes contact. Where your toe lands is immaterial to the measurement.
A 5' jump in the Olympics means you have CLEARED 5 feet. A 10' jump would be from the front of your toe, to the back of whatever body part is furthest back. So a 10' jump would clear a 10' pit.
The Olympics seems like a pretty authoritative body for determining the definition how such measurements are made. Do you have a better one?
If you google "how to measure a horizontal jump" you'll get dozens of different sources agreeing with this method by the way. Jumps are measured toe-to-heel, not toe-to-toe.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We are not talking about how to measure jumps in a competition. We never have been. We are talking about movement in Pathfinder.
Just like we don't talk about how to hit someone with a boxer's uppercut when discussing unarmed strike. Or how we don't take into account acceleration and deceleration when running or when controlling a mount's movement.
We are talking about how far a character moves.
If a character moves 5' while swimming, running, flying, walking, burrowing, or tumbling, that character moves 5', or one square away. If a character moves 5' while jumping, that character does not clear a 5' hole, because that character only moved 5', and is still one square away.
If you fall off a 5' thick wall that lines up with the grid, and land 5' away, you land one square away. There is not a 5' gap between you and the wall. If you land 10' away, then you are two squares away. There is a 5' gap between you and the wall.
Yet again, we all agree, the DC for that 5' hole is 5. You just can't move 5' on a roll of result of 5 and still clear the 5' hole.
Simple mathematics shows that you HAVE to move MORE than 5'. But it says that if you roll a 5, you move 5'.
I think we all know what they meant. But it is not what it says.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with what komoda is saying. The wording in the crb is poor, and doesn't say what they were intending.
(And of course, the faq overrules the poorly worded statement.)
We are talking about how far a character moves.
you are.
The rules aren't. You are equating distance traveled with distance traveled in the jump. They're not the same thing.
move 20 feet jump 20 feet move 20 feet.
distance moved, 60 feet. Distance jumped 20 feet.
It's plain in the text. It was plain in the table. It got FAq'd. Leave over.
We are not talking about how to measure jumps in a competition. We never have been. We are talking about movement in Pathfinder.
Jumps are measured toe-to-heel. Unless you've got evidence that that isn't true. This is how everyone measures jumps.... except for the people in this thread who want to measure it in a different way that "proves" their point. Except that's not how definitions work.
Jumps are measured toe-to-heal.
Synthesize this information and then apply it to the rules and see what happens.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Look, like, man, we're all on one side of a pit already. So, like, why jump it, man? You just wind up on another side. Which is, like, basically just the side of a pit all over again.
Think about it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just saw a 10' pit, looked at the table, found 10' = 10 DC and ran with it. Or found the bit that said you jump your roll in feet and that obviously matched the DC to jump an obstacle.
Overthinking it may be the problem.
Well, on its face that makes sense. It makes a lot of sense, is rules consistent, etc.
But Pathfinder's movement is measured in 5 foot increments. So the confusion comes from the fact that that 10' jump actually moves you 15 feet.
A lot of people get stuck on the grid but it is a mistake and has nothing to do with my position that the rules do not match. The rules state that if the result of your acrobatics check during a running jump is 8, that you land 8' away. It doesn't care if you were trying to jump 1', 14', or whatever. 8' may put you in the next square or two squares away, depending on where the hole is in the grid. Again, none of this matters to my point.
My point is that if you land 8' after your start, and the hole is 8' wide, you land in the hole.
Furthermore, if you are jumping from wall to wall to wall to wall and those walls are 1' wide and 3' apart, it is almost impossible to land on one of them following the rules. if you have an acrobatics of 6, you cannot roll low enough to land on the closest wall. Unlike every other skill where beating the DC is in your favor, this one use of this one skill may require you to hit an exact number. And that number may be too low for you to actually hit.
Imagine trying to jump 5' to a 5' ledge with a 100' pit on the other side of it. You would only have a 25% chance of making it no matter what your jump check is. Otherwise, RAW, your jump would be too short or too long.
The line that reads something to the effect of "Your result is the distance traveled in the jump..." is a horrible line that just needs to be removed. Even if you ignore the fact that matching the DC would put you in a hole based on this line (which we all ignore or disagree with) it means that you could easily over-jump your target and gives you no way in which to NOT jump so far.
Imagine jumping from one wagon to another. What are they, 4' wide? So you would have to fall in a range of 8 numbers, not just clear the distance between the two. If they are 1' apart you better not have more than a 9 acrobatics because any result higher than a 10 would put you over the target wagon. It doesn't make sense when every other skill is considered more successful the higher you roll.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just saw a 10' pit, looked at the table, found 10' = 10 DC and ran with it. Or found the bit that said you jump your roll in feet and that obviously matched the DC to jump an obstacle.
Overthinking it may be the problem.
Well, on its face that makes sense. It makes a lot of sense, is rules consistent, etc.
But Pathfinder's movement is measured in 5 foot increments. So the confusion comes from the fact that that 10' jump actually moves you 15 feet.
*sigh*
Again, only if the pit is grid aligned, and only for size medium and smaller creatures.
Furthermore, if you take a running start, you move a lot more than 15'.
The rules quite clearly say that the DC is based on the distance traveled in the jump. Though I can understand some confusion since Komodo for some bizarre reason always fails to include that bolded part when he quotes the rule.
I believe distance traveled in the jump = distance traveled so:
In the jump,In the swim,
In the run,
In the burrow,
would all mean the same thing, so "in the jump" is not relevant.
You believe distance traveled in the jump = distance cleared by the jump plus the area needed to safely land (whatever distance that may be, because we have no guidance for that). I do not agree that they are the same thing. But whatever.
I just saw a 10' pit, looked at the table, found 10' = 10 DC and ran with it. Or found the bit that said you jump your roll in feet and that obviously matched the DC to jump an obstacle.
Overthinking it may be the problem.
Well, on its face that makes sense. It makes a lot of sense, is rules consistent, etc.
But Pathfinder's movement is measured in 5 foot increments. So the confusion comes from the fact that that 10' jump actually moves you 15 feet.
A lot of people get stuck on the grid but it is a mistake and has nothing to do with my position that the rules do not match. The rules state that if the result of your acrobatics check during a running jump is 8, that you land 8' away. It doesn't care if you were trying to jump 1', 14', or whatever. 8' may put you in the next square or two squares away, depending on where the hole is in the grid. Again, none of this matters to my point.
My point is that if you land 8' after your start, and the hole is 8' wide, you land in the hole.
Furthermore, if you are jumping from wall to wall to wall to wall and those walls are 1' wide and 3' apart, it is almost impossible to land on one of them following the rules. if you have an acrobatics of 6, you cannot roll low enough to land on the closest wall. Unlike every other skill where beating the DC is in your favor, this one use of this one skill may require you to hit an exact number. And that number may be too low for you to actually hit.
Imagine trying to jump 5' to a 5' ledge with a 100' pit on the other side of it. You would only have a 25% chance of making it no matter what your jump check is. Otherwise, RAW, your jump would be too short or too long.
The line that reads something to the effect of "Your result is the distance traveled in the jump..." is a horrible line that just needs to be removed. Even if you ignore the fact that matching the DC would put you in a hole based on this line (which we all ignore or disagree...
Since you want to get technical, what if a DC 10 check has you jump 10' 6"? That fits within the rounding rules for the game, has you clear the 10' obstacle, and is still less than 11', which would require DC 11.
distance traveled in the jump
Jumping distance is measured toe to heel
Thus if the distance you traveled in a jump is 20ft, that means you cleared 20ft with your jump.
only if you exclude the definition of measuring the distance of jumping and look at this trying to find an issue with it can you find an issue with it.
When you accept that the distanced traveled in a jump is measured like normal jumping then 20ft jump clears 20ft as you traveled 20ft with your jump. And since jump is measured toe to heal, you're in no way in a pit.
My point is that if you land 8' after your start, and the hole is 8' wide, you land in the hole.
This requires you to invent your own method of how jumping distance is measured.
Jumping distance is measured from toe-to-heel. When you jump 8', you clear 8' of space. Not 8' - foot length.
It goes:
toe<----8'---->heel
You don't get to invent your own measurement system just because it's convenient for your argument. If you would like to claim that your method of measurement is standard, perhaps you could present some information to back up your claim?
What you are describing would be a jump of (8' minus foot length), which would be less than 8', but an 8' jump always CLEARS a distance of 8'. Otherwise it wouldn't be an 8' jump, it would be described as a distance less than 8'.
I just saw a 10' pit, looked at the table, found 10' = 10 DC and ran with it. Or found the bit that said you jump your roll in feet and that obviously matched the DC to jump an obstacle.
Overthinking it may be the problem.
Well, on its face that makes sense. It makes a lot of sense, is rules consistent, etc.
But Pathfinder's movement is measured in 5 foot increments. So the confusion comes from the fact that that 10' jump actually moves you 15 feet.
*sigh*
Again, only if the pit is grid aligned, and only for size medium and smaller creatures.
Furthermore, if you take a running start, you move a lot more than 15'.
The rules quite clearly say that the DC is based on the distance traveled in the jump. Though I can understand some confusion since Komodo for some bizarre reason always fails to include that bolded part when he quotes the rule.
I believe distance traveled in the jump = distance traveled so:
In the jump,
In the swim,
In the run,
In the burrow,
would all mean the same thing, so "in the jump" is not relevant.You believe distance traveled in the jump = distance cleared by the jump plus the area needed to safely land (whatever distance that may be, because we have no guidance for that). I do not agree that they are the same thing. But whatever.
Wait. You can't mean what you seem to be saying.
If I take a 10' running start to jump a 10' pit, that's a 20 DC? Because I travelled 20'? (Or maybe 25 since I need a 5' square on the other side.)
I don't have any idea how why you think I would be advocating anything like that. I am only saying that according to the second form of measurement listed in acrobatics "The result equals the distance traveled in the jump..." (paraphrased) jumping 10' = 10' of movement. This does not work with the DC equals the distance cleared, which is the first way that it is measured in the acrobatics skill.
If you jump UP 5', it is only 5' of movement, right? You measured that from bottom of heel on the first surface to bottom of heel on the second. You are 5' away from where you started, not 5' plus the height of your foot.
I only advocate that the movement part (not the DC) is based on heel-to-heel or toe-to-toe measurements (they should match barring very strange feet) and not toe-to-heal measurements.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't have any idea how why you think I would be advocating anything like that. I am only saying that according to the second form of measurement listed in acrobatics "The result equals the distance traveled in the jump..." (paraphrased) jumping 10' = 10' of movement. This does not work with the DC equals the distance cleared, which is the...
I think the dissonance here is that the jump does not equal the move action.
For example, if you were two squares away from a 3 square wide pit, then the total movement cost to enter the square on the opposite side of the pit would be 25. 7.5 to get to the edge of the pit, 15 to jump it with a DC of 15, 2.5 to get to the center of the square on the opposite side.
The distance travelled in the jump is 15. The dc for the jump is 15. The distance travelled total is 25, and total is not equal to the jump.
|
I only advocate that the movement part (not the DC) is based on heel-to-heel or toe-to-toe measurements (they should match barring very strange feet) and not toe-to-heal measurements.Why would you advocate that, knowing it leads to a failure state?
Just perform a 180° turn in midair, and since there are no facing rules in Pathfinder, you end up facing whatever direction you want anyway! Problem solved! /snark
Seriously, I've more or less given up arguing with Komoda. They seem dead set on picking the most obtuse possible interpretation and running with it regardless of evidence.
distance traveled in the jump
Jumping distance is measured toe to heel
Thus if the distance you traveled in a jump is 20ft, that means you cleared 20ft with your jump.
only if you exclude the definition of measuring the distance of jumping and look at this trying to find an issue with it can you find an issue with it.
When you accept that the distanced traveled in a jump is measured like normal jumping then 20ft jump clears 20ft as you traveled 20ft with your jump. And since jump is measured toe to heal, you're in no way in a pit.
But on top of this, you have to say the distance actually traveled is 21' or whatever you feel the "gap + safe landing area" equals. We have no guidance for this that I am aware of.
That is counter intuitive to "the result equals distance traveled in the jump..." as you don't actually have a number to use and you HAVE to make up something for the safe landing area to see where you actually land.
So say the gap is DC 13 and starts right on the edge of the grid. Your result is a 15. What square do you land in? 3 squares away, or 4? I say that RAW (and to be clear, I am advocating the REMOVAL of this rule, not the adherence of it) since "the result equals distance traveled in the jump..." you land in square 3. I believe you are saying you land in square 4.
Mind you, based on the rule, you as a player cannot attempt to jump exactly over the 13' gap, according to the rule "the result equals distance traveled in the jump..." There is no room for hitting a target. So you have a 10% chance AT BEST of landing on a 2' ledge.
Unless you are involved in a jumping competition, "the result equals distance traveled in the jump..." is a useless rule. If the rule was removed, any jump result equal to or over your target (in this case 13) would land you where you want. Again, there is currently no way to do that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't have any idea how why you think I would be advocating anything like that. I am only saying that according to the second form of measurement listed in acrobatics "The result equals the distance traveled in the jump..." (paraphrased) jumping 10' = 10' of movement. This does not work with the DC equals the distance cleared, which is the...I think the dissonance here is that the jump does not equal the move action.
For example, if you were two squares away from a 3 square wide pit, then the total movement cost to enter the square on the opposite side of the pit would be 25. 7.5 to get to the edge of the pit, 15 to jump it with a DC of 15, 2.5 to get to the center of the square on the opposite side.
The distance travelled in the jump is 15. The dc for the jump is 15. The distance travelled total is 25, and total is not equal to the jump.
My position has nothing to do with the grid, and never did. Like I stated before, I think "distance traveled in the jump" = "distance traveled on the map." Not grid spaces, just 1' increments of the jump.
If you get a 1, you move 1'
If you get a 5, you move 5'
If you get a 156, you move 156' (assuming you can).
I don't believe the line was meant to convey "distance traveled in the jump + safe landing area" = "distance traveled on the map."
Now again, I think the line needs to be removed. It is kind of like when drawing in Inventor or other high end CAD program and there are too many constraints. In this case, the two constraints do not match up.
But on top of this, you have to say the distance actually traveled is 21' or whatever you feel the "gap + safe landing area" equals. We have no guidance for this that I am aware of.distance traveled in the jump
Jumping distance is measured toe to heel
Thus if the distance you traveled in a jump is 20ft, that means you cleared 20ft with your jump.
only if you exclude the definition of measuring the distance of jumping and look at this trying to find an issue with it can you find an issue with it.
When you accept that the distanced traveled in a jump is measured like normal jumping then 20ft jump clears 20ft as you traveled 20ft with your jump. And since jump is measured toe to heal, you're in no way in a pit.
NO WE DON'T. This is what everyone is saying, this is what the FAQ says. You don't add anything to the jump. The jump is measured like a normal jump, aka toe to heel, since that matches exactly what the FAQ says to do.
That is counter intuitive to "the result equals distance traveled in the jump..." as you don't actually have a number to use and you HAVE to make up something for the safe landing area to see where you actually land.
Again, NO. See above. The FAQ is clear that you don't add anything extra to the jump. 20ft is 20ft and DC 20 to go 20ft.
So say the gap is DC 13 and starts right on the edge of the grid. Your result is a 15. What square do you land in? 3 squares away, or 4? I say that RAW (and to be clear, I am advocating the REMOVAL of this rule, not the adherence of it) since "the result equals distance traveled in the jump..." you land in square 3. I believe you are saying you land in square 4.
So it's not super clear what you're advocating. All of us say that the physical landing happens in square 3. Now if the GM rules that you can't end your turn in square 3 you need 20ft of movement available to be able to finish your move by moving into square 4. Otherwise you'd be ending your turn in a pit and fall, even though you successfully made the jump.
Mind you, based on the rule, you as a player cannot attempt to jump exactly over the 13' gap, according to the rule "the result equals distance traveled in the jump..." There is no room for hitting a target. So you have a 10% chance AT BEST of landing on a 2' ledge.
The DC to jump a 13ft pit is DC 13. DC is meet or beat.
Unless you are involved in a jumping competition, "the result equals distance traveled in the jump..." is a useless rule. If the rule was removed, any jump result equal to or over your target (in this case 13) would land you where you want. Again, there is currently no way to do that.
The rule is there for when you're NOT jumping over a pit, but wanting to jump on your turn. You want to jump over difficult terrain, you make the check to see how far you're able to jump to know how many squares of difficult terrain you can ignore.
My position has nothing to do with the grid, and never did. Like I stated before, I think "distance traveled in the jump" = "distance traveled on the map." Not grid spaces, just 1' increments of the jump.I don't have any idea how why you think I would be advocating anything like that. I am only saying that according to the second form of measurement listed in acrobatics "The result equals the distance traveled in the jump..." (paraphrased) jumping 10' = 10' of movement. This does not work with the DC equals the distance cleared, which is the...I think the dissonance here is that the jump does not equal the move action.
For example, if you were two squares away from a 3 square wide pit, then the total movement cost to enter the square on the opposite side of the pit would be 25. 7.5 to get to the edge of the pit, 15 to jump it with a DC of 15, 2.5 to get to the center of the square on the opposite side.
The distance travelled in the jump is 15. The dc for the jump is 15. The distance travelled total is 25, and total is not equal to the jump.
And in this you're incorrect. Distance of a jump is a clear thing in our world where it's from toe to heel. It's not the distance traveled on the map.
I'm not using the grid either.
I really don't see what the problem is.
The fact that this would make the DCs variable depending on the creature's size apparently doesn't bother them all that much.
Actually came up in a game. What is the DC for the gargantuan construct to jump a 10ft pit? What is the fall damage for falling into a pit that you would need to squeeze into?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Two plus two is five, for sufficiently large values of two.
Well, if we're rounding 2.4 down to 2, then adding to get 4.8, which rounds up to 5...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I only advocate that the movement part (not the DC) is based on heel-to-heel or toe-to-toe measurements (they should match barring very strange feet) and not toe-to-heal measurements.Why would you advocate that, knowing it leads to a failure state?Just perform a 180° turn in midair, and since there are no facing rules in Pathfinder, you end up facing whatever direction you want anyway! Problem solved! /snark
Seriously, I've more or less given up arguing with Komoda. They seem dead set on picking the most obtuse possible interpretation and running with it regardless of evidence.
It is hard to debate here because everyone is SO SURE they see the only way a rule can possibly be read. They KNOW they are playing it right, no matter what.
And they might be right. I always try to look at things from the other position to see how they might have gotten there. But on this forum, if the position is different than the popular one, you are treated as a leper, not as a thoughtful being looking to work through the system.
This is most evident when people ridicule what they think are your ideas, when you are saying no such thing. I know the two rules as I read them, CANNOT work together. So the only way to reconcile that is to change the meaning of the actual words "the result equals distance traveled in the jump..." which is what I believe the opposing position has done, without even realizing it. The fact that they can't be reconciled as I read them, and that "the result equals distance traveled in the jump..." makes it VERY difficult to land where you want, is why I advocate for removal of the line.
Even though I pointed out a few times how tough it is to land on a spot that you want to with that line, no one has agreed (or disagreed) with that point. If you have a +20 jump check and try to jump over a 2' stream, you end up at least 2 squares away! That is a stupid rule. You probably ignore it in your games already. Wouldn't you want it just removed?
I mean seriously, even if I am wrong and the measurement is toe-to-heel, not one dissenting person has even agreed that it is counter intuitive and could see why I am having trouble looking at it that way when all other measurements of "distance traveled" in Pathfinder would be measured from toe-to-toe (or center-to-center, line-to-line, edge-to-edge, or whatever).
There is no effort to empathize or understand dissenting positions.
For those that get my position, I can see why it looks like I am trying to force it. But I try not to keep coming back and just restating my position. I do so when someone else misrepresents or misunderstands my position. Like thejeff and Johny_Devo did this time around.
Say something like, "I see your point, but disagree" and the debate is over. "Your wrong." "No evidence." "That's not how it works." "Your obtuse."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
BTW, I find the "toe-to-heel" arguments, while accurate, to be pedantic and also thoroughly unconvincing. Say I want to jump over a pit. I take a running start and somehow miraculously launch myself from my left toes, which land right at the very edge of the pit to the millimeter, but not over the edge at all. Then I land so that the back of my heel is right at the edge of the pit, so that any awkwardness in landing might drop me backwards into the pit instead of falling forward the way I intended (of course, in PF you don't end up prone anyway, for some reason.).
Suffice it to say that, IRL, I'd prefer to give myself at least a few inches of leeway on takeoff and a foot or more leeway on landing, if the alternative is to fall into a pit and probably die.
The rule should have been phrased something like, "The DC to clear an obstruction is equal to the width of the obstruction; meeting this DC allows a jumper to clear it with sufficient leeway to ensure a safe takeoff and landing."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And in this you're incorrect. Distance of a jump is a clear thing in our world where it's from toe to heel. It's not the distance traveled on the map.My position has nothing to do with the grid, and never did. Like I stated before, I think "distance traveled in the jump" = "distance traveled on the map." Not grid spaces, just 1' increments of the jump.I don't have any idea how why you think I would be advocating anything like that. I am only saying that according to the second form of measurement listed in acrobatics "The result equals the distance traveled in the jump..." (paraphrased) jumping 10' = 10' of movement. This does not work with the DC equals the distance cleared, which is the...I think the dissonance here is that the jump does not equal the move action.
For example, if you were two squares away from a 3 square wide pit, then the total movement cost to enter the square on the opposite side of the pit would be 25. 7.5 to get to the edge of the pit, 15 to jump it with a DC of 15, 2.5 to get to the center of the square on the opposite side.
The distance travelled in the jump is 15. The dc for the jump is 15. The distance travelled total is 25, and total is not equal to the jump.
But in the game we play, distance traveled is on the map.
|
So, if I get this right, there's "DC 10 to jump over a 10-foot gap" and "DC 10 to jump exactly 10 feet; you have to exceed the DC to jump over it".
Due to having to meet, not exceed, other DCs (such as in other skill checks and saving throws), and due to the movement system's rounding down to the nearest 5, I'm using the former. Also for simplicity's sake, rounding down however many inches were needed to go from solid ground to solid ground.
However, if I'm the GM and I have a player who insists it's DC 11 or I don't know how distance works, I'll describe the pit, gap, or chasm as nine-and-a-half feet to the other side, by your estimation. No parabolic calculations required, either.