So you are saying if you ignore encumbrance completely - and base speed - then your idea makes more sense.That isn't even close to the same zip code as to what I'm saying. So no.
What I said is that your interpretation of how speed interacts with encumbrance is 100% irrelevant to how speed interacts with acrobatics.
Except it's 100% not - and that's the point. It's only 100% irrelevant if you ignore it completely otherwise it proves your entire argument is less logical.
Which is why you keep ignoring it.
So, you pick how you want speed to work with encumbrance. Tell me how it works. I'll agree with you 100%, mostly just to shut you up.
Ok I'll try this again. Remember for this exercise I'm 100% in agreement with you that speed is speed and there is no such thing as base speed (the same thing I said two posts ago and you accused me of ignoring you but whatever).
- Question 1: Do you calculate speed for someone wearing armor before they put it on or after?
I am assuming you answer after.
- Question 2: Does a human fighter wearing full plate move at 30 or 20 speed?
I am assuming you just said 20
- Question 3: Where did you find that modified speed for full plate?
I am assuming you said "Armor and Encumbrance for Other Base SpeedsThe table below provides reduced speed figures for all base speeds from 5 feet to 120 feet (in 5-foot increments)."
From http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/coreRulebook/additionalRules.html
That is the official rule table for armor speed.
- Question 4: Does a nude human fighter with a haste spell move at 60?
I am assuming you just said yes
- Question 5: What is the modified speed for the fighter (who is at 60 speed) if he puts on full plate based on the table provided?
I am assuming you just looked and found this:
55 ft.–60 ft. 40 ft.
- Question 6: If a Human fighter wearing full plate (without haste) is at 20 feet of movement - and you give them haste (+30) - and as you stated there is no base speed so all you do is add 30 from haste what is his new speed?
I'm assuming you answered 50.
After all that - final question (relevant to your acrobatics question):
How can the acrobatics modifiers for the two fighters be the same - when one is moving at 40 feet per round, and the other is moving at 50 feet per round? Or if you claim they move the same - explain how you came to that conclusion.
Consider this:
A character without any sort of armor training, just proficiency, wears medium armor and thus has a base speed of 20.
Haste is an enhancement bonus equal to your base speed, to a maximum of 30. Remember that our proposition is that "base speed" simply means "how much a base move will move you". Call base + haste a "modified base speed" for how it works mechanically.
So because the medium armor character has a base of 20, haste's doubling up to a maximum of +30 results in a total speed of 40. This character's racial bonus to jumps will increase from -4 to +4.
Now assume that, while under haste, the character becomes encumbered. A character with a movement speed of 20 goes down to 15, which thus also affects the enhancement bonus to that movement speed, which is equal to double his base speed.
Your earlier example works the same way. Naked combatant has 30 feet speed, and has haste cast on him, bringing his speed up to 60. he has a +12 racial bonus to jump checks. Robed wizard decides his exposure is distasteful, and uses magic to dress him in his medium armor, thus reducing his base base speed to 20, and the "double your speed up to 30" enhancement bonus likewise gets reduced to 20, for a total speed of 40, and a +4 racial bonus to jump checks.
Basically, what I'm personally claiming is that movement speed rules is one of those odd things that is not well defined, so to me this is the best and most logical way to explain it.
and as you stated there is no base speed so all you do is add 30 from haste what is his new speed?When did I state this?
Again, as I've said over and over and over again. I don't care what you do with base speed and speed.
And as I have said over and over - saying this screws up the encumbrance rules.
That seems to be where you have a breakdown - I don't care about acrobatics at this point of the argument - assuming you are correct - you broke encumbrance - I then explain how - I ask you why that makes more sense than using 'base speed' which doesn't break encumbrance, and still works with the rest of the game, but *does* mean you can't double penalize someone using jump.
All that matters to my argument is what affects the acrobatics roll, and that is your actual speed, no matter what you call it or how you calculate it.
As above - my point still being if you do that encumbrance breaks.
Now, to address your argument. Since you seem to be saying that dwarves can't ride horses, how do you justify that based on whether a fighter can wear plate mail?
As I've never said dwarf or horse, the moons under the sea of tibet ride tokyo like a wild horse.
Your earlier example works the same way. Naked combatant has 30 feet speed, and has haste cast on him, bringing his speed up to 60. he has a +12 racial bonus to jump checks. Robed wizard decides his exposure is distasteful, and uses magic to dress him in his medium armor, thus reducing his base base speed to 20, and the "double your speed up to 30" enhancement bonus likewise gets reduced to 20, for a total speed of 40, and a +4 racial bonus to jump checks.
Basically, what I'm personally claiming is that movement speed rules is one of those odd things that is not well defined, so to me this is the best and most logical way to explain it.
:)
My question to you back is this:
All of the hasted creature's modes of movement (including land movement, burrow, climb, fly, and swim) increase by 30 feet, to a maximum of twice the subject's normal speed using that form of movement.
Are you suggesting that normal speed is current speed - and not what would be normal without encumbrance? I can respect that stance, however I wonder why they wouldn't just say current speed - or speed - why the extra words.
At least it would make sense from a logical viewpoint.
Clearly, your rules regarding encumbrance mean that dwarves can't ride horses.As I've never said dwarf or horse, the moons under the sea of tibet ride tokyo like a wild horse.
How so?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are you suggesting that normal speed is current speed - and not what would be normal without encumbrance?
Yes. Essentially, your "normal" speed is your final modified speed after mundane influence, and is the "base" speed of a character. A creature's "modified base speed" is what happens after magical influence, such as haste. Pretty much anything that relies on movement (A move action, acrobatics, a charge, etc) looks only at the modified base speed for how it functions.
I can respect that stance, however I wonder why they wouldn't just say current speed - or speed - why the extra words.
Because pathfinder is infamous for unnecessary verbosity and casually presented rules. Stack that on top of the fact that it's a collection of many documents written by many different authors, who have different casual styles of writing and different levels of understanding of the rules system they're writing for. It frustrates me endlessly. I'm not saying there's an easy solution, just that the issue exists that basically every "game term" is used in 4-5 different ways.
Are you suggesting that normal speed is current speed - and not what would be normal without encumbrance?
Yes. Essentially, your "normal" speed is your final modified speed after mundane influence, and is the "base" speed of a character. A creature's "modified base speed" is what happens after magical influence, such as haste. Pretty much anything that relies on movement (A move action, acrobatics, a charge, etc) looks only at the modified base speed for how it functions.
I can respect that stance, however I wonder why they wouldn't just say current speed - or speed - why the extra words.Because pathfinder is infamous for unnecessary verbosity and casually presented rules. Stack that on top of the fact that it's a collection of many documents written by many different authors, who have different casual styles of writing and different levels of understanding of the rules system they're writing for. It frustrates me endlessly. I'm not saying there's an easy solution, just that the issue exists that basically every "game term" is used in 4-5 different ways.
I accept it could work that way - however I have to say applying a racial penalty to acrobatics due to encumbrance seems loopy to me - considering that using base speed works the exact same way with the exception of jump penalties - and so avoids double penalties and racial modifiers for carrying stuff - that seems more logical to me :)
What does the game gain by applying racial modifiers for non racial stuff?
|
What does the game gain by applying racial modifiers for non racial stuff?
It lets it stack with other racial stuff. In this particular case I don't know why other than perhaps when acrobatics was written (the bonus existed in the "jump" skill from 3.5, but I believe there it was untyped) they decided to type it and thought racial worked best because speed is first and foremost determined by race. Personally I'd make it a circumstance bonus, but that's just me.
My question to you back is this:
All of the hasted creature's modes of movement (including land movement, burrow, climb, fly, and swim) increase by 30 feet, to a maximum of twice the subject's normal speed using that form of movement.Are you suggesting that normal speed is current speed - and not what would be normal without encumbrance? I can respect that stance, however I wonder why they wouldn't just say current speed - or speed - why the extra words.
At least it would make sense from a logical viewpoint.
A better question to ask: if normal speed is base speed, why didn't they just say base speed? Normal speed appears to be the speed you move at normally with whatever armor/encumbrance level you have and your race. Which of course means haste and encumbrance rules work just fine to put that armor wearing human fighter at 40' speed, while the only time we had to look at the encumbrance/armor speed table was at the point he donned his armor (probably at character creation).
I accept it could work that way - however I have to say applying a racial penalty to acrobatics due to encumbrance seems loopy to me
Is your objection that being encumbered applies a penalty? Or that it is specifically a racial penalty? I can agree with you that it being a racial penalty is weird, but I hope we can agree that, in real life, being encumbered makes it harder to jump farther? Or that being faster/slower makes it easier/harder to jump farther (regardless of why we are faster or slower).
It is this faster/slower modifying jumping ability that:
1) Fits with real world experience, and thus is common sense.
2) Matches the various reminder text in the multitude of spells that mention it.
3) Conflicts with the acrobatics use of the term 'base speed' only if you insist there is a meaningful difference between the terns 'speed' and 'base speed' - as I noted up thread, the only place there is really a meaningful difference is when you are consulting the armor/encumbrance tables. All others cases very much appear to be an inconsistent use of the two phrases to mean the same thing.
It is similar to the use of the phrases 'spell level' and 'spell slot level' I discussed 3 years ago. The books do not use them consistently, which results in seemingly conflicting RAW. I am confident that if this came to a FAQ, the PDT would answer it in the same sort of manner they answered the metamagic FAQ that was spawned from that thread. The answer would be 'whatever your current speed is gives a bonus/penalty to your jump check.'
Trivially, removing the word 'base' from the acrobatics description would entirely clear up the issue, and make things fit with my 3 points above.
I accept it could work that way - however I have to say applying a racial penalty to acrobatics due to encumbrance seems loopy to meIs your objection that being encumbered applies a penalty? Or that it is specifically a racial penalty? I can agree with you that it being a racial penalty is weird, but I hope we can agree that, in real life, being encumbered makes it harder to jump farther? Or that being faster/slower makes it easier/harder to jump farther (regardless of why we are faster or slower).
It is this faster/slower modifying jumping ability that:
1) Fits with real world experience, and thus is common sense.
2) Matches the various reminder text in the multitude of spells that mention it.
3) Conflicts with the acrobatics use of the term 'base speed' only if you insist there is a meaningful difference between the terns 'speed' and 'base speed' - as I noted up thread, the only place there is really a meaningful difference is when you are consulting the armor/encumbrance tables. All others cases very much appear to be an inconsistent use of the two phrases to mean the same thing.It is similar to the use of the phrases 'spell level' and 'spell slot level' I discussed 3 years ago. The books do not use them consistently, which results in seemingly conflicting RAW. I am confident that if this came to a FAQ, the PDT would answer it in the same sort of manner they answered the metamagic FAQ that was spawned from that thread. The answer would be 'whatever your current speed is gives a bonus/penalty to your jump check.'
Trivially, removing the word 'base' from the acrobatics description would entirely clear up the issue, and make things fit with my 3 points above.
No using base speed works out fine (the math works both ways if you accept 'normal' as 'base speed' lets just ignore that for this comment though).
My objection is based on:
1) There are already penalties for being encumbered - oddly they are said never to stack and on top of that if you look closely at the rules for encumbrance there are no 'increasing penalties' - you go from 'modified movement - like armor check - that specifically doesn't stack with armor check' to 0 feet of movement - nothing in between -
A character can lift as much as double his maximum load off the ground, but he or she can only stagger around with it. While overloaded in this way, the character loses any Dexterity bonus to AC and can move only 5 feet per round (as a full-round action).
So from 'heavy load' to 'double heavy load' you move at whatever speed your armor gives you - then bam - no movement - even if you started with a speed of 90 - you go from 90 to 5 feet a round. Oh and you go from a +25 acrobatics check to -15 - instantly. If encumbrance and armor were supposed to affect your racial jump bonuses why not graduated penalties? Seems like they aren't supposed to interact honestly, because (back to the double dip penalties).
2) it doesn't fit with expeditious retreat which uses base speed. It doesn't fit with the movement rules anywhere else - the only places it 'fits' is with haste and slow. You are being awfully expansive of where it fits when it fits more places as 'base speed' and 'modified speed' than it doesn't.
3) No it conflicts with explicit rules that lay out modifiers of different types shouldn't interact. Racial bonuses don't affect enhancement bonuses - except for haste and slow apparently which are the only two places in the rules they do.
That bothers me.
Your Trivially wouldn't fix the racial bonus issue, it wouldn't fit the rest of the movement section that talks about base speed, and it wouldn't fit the other places in the game that interact with it - but yeah it'd fix haste and slow.
I am missing why making the rules more of a mess because of two spells (that already have had errata against them because they were cut/pasted and not cleaned up correctly - see monk flurry) makes the game a better place.
If I jump down a 200f pit with full plate and I'm affected by the spell slow does that mean I can only fall at 10f per round?
If I jump down a 200f pit with full plate and I'm affected by the spell slow does that mean I can only fall at 10f per round?
You fall at 200 feet per round unless you have an umbrella in your hand - at which point you slow to 10 feet per round.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I jump down a 200f pit with full plate and I'm affected by the spell slow does that mean I can only fall at 10f per round?You fall at 200 feet per round unless you have an umbrella in your hand - at which point you slow to 10 feet per round.
But you need a free hand to hold the umbrella, and two hands to open it. You can do it with a weapon and a buckler, while a light shield would be controversial.
Oh and opening the umbrella is a standard action, unless it's the kind that opens pressing a button (Magic Umbrella), in which case it's just an immediate action and you can actually save yourself from the fall.
No using base speed works out fine (the math works both ways if you accept 'normal' as 'base speed' lets just ignore that for this comment though).
My objection is based on:
1) There are already penalties for being encumbered - oddly they are said never to stack and on top of that if you look closely at the rules for encumbrance there are no 'increasing penalties' - you go from 'modified movement - like armor check - that specifically doesn't stack with armor check' to 0 feet of movement - nothing in between -
So from 'heavy load' to 'double heavy load' you move at whatever speed your armor gives you - then bam - no movement - even if you started with a speed of 90 - you go from 90 to 5 feet a round. Oh and you go from a +25 acrobatics check to -15 - instantly. If encumbrance and armor were supposed to affect your racial jump bonuses why not graduated penalties? Seems like they aren't supposed to interact honestly, because (back to the double dip penalties).
I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers of +25 and -15 from. 90 - 30 = 60, or 6 increments of 10', giving +24 to jump checks. On the converse 0 - 30 = -30, or 3 decrements of 10, giving -12 (an error I made initially, of only applying a -8, but it should have been -12 up thread). Then we consider what is the penalty for being over encumbered? If you look at the chart - there isn't one listed. So we have several choices. There is no penalty (I hope you don't think this is the case since heavy encumbrance is -6). We just take the next step, at -9 (this is probably the best case scenario for the jumper the GM should consider). But, IMO, it should be infinite. Just like in real life, if you are so heavily loaded down you can barely move, and certainly can't jump, pathfinder should probably follow this. Just like we don't need a rule to tell us that dead characters can't take actions, I really hope we don't need a rule that tells us that characters that can barely move, CAN'T jump (or swim, or go rock climbing) - at least not without having that as one of their default forms of movement - e.g, a sea serpent loaded down, should still be able to swim 5'.
But let's talk a little bit about that "double dipping of penalties".
First off, unlike bonuses, which generally have a type, and same types do not stack:
Penalties are numerical values that are subtracted from a check or statistical score. Penalties do not have a type and most penalties stack with one another.
So having two (or more) penalties apply to the same thing is not a problem.
Second, since penalties are allowed to stack, in order for them not to stack they need to tell us that these penalties do not stack. (refer again to the quote above). There is no such non-stacking mentioned regarding encumbrance penalties and speed to jump checks.
Third, given that the penalties are different amounts, they are certainly not the same penalty.
Fourth, why do you hate dwarves and small races? But dwarves is an especially interesting one. Base speed 20'. Move speed while heavily encumbered, still 20', because he's a dwarf. -4 to jump checks because of base speed. -6 to jump checks because of encumbrance. Total penalty -10. Turn him into a human, his speed is still 20', he is still heavily encumbered, but now his penalty is only -6 total? You think that is right? That is a messy rules system right there.
2) it doesn't fit with expeditious retreat which uses base speed. It doesn't fit with the movement rules anywhere else - the only places it 'fits' is with haste and slow. You are being awfully expansive of where it fits when it fits more places as 'base speed' and 'modified speed' than it doesn't.
ER, increases base speed. But what is the reasoning it gives for improving jump?
As with any effect that increases your speed...
Note an important word missing - "base". It is restating a general rule (one that you have confused in acrobatics because acrobatics says "base", but as can be seen here, the two phrases are used interchangeably).
3) No it conflicts with explicit rules that lay out modifiers of different types shouldn't interact. Racial bonuses don't affect enhancement bonuses - except for haste and slow apparently which are the only two places in the rules they do.
Your going to have to provide a rules citation for this. As I've shown above, the rules explicitly say penalties stack unless they tell us otherwise. But not only that, bonuses of different types also stack and interact with each other. Its bonuses of the same type (except dodge) that do not stack.
But let me give an example of multiple penalties interacting. If I'm slowed, my speed is halved. If I'm also in rough terrain, my speed is effectively quartered. Just because I'm limited to 15' of movement does not mean I get to ignore difficult terrain - it still costs me 10' of movement for each 5' of distance I cross.
Your Trivially wouldn't fix the racial bonus issue, it wouldn't fit the rest of the movement section that talks about base speed, and it wouldn't fit the other places in the game that interact with it - but yeah it'd fix haste and slow.I am missing why making the rules more of a mess because of two spells (that already have had errata against them because they were cut/pasted and not cleaned up correctly - see monk flurry) makes the game a better place.
It would. Your only claim that having a slow speed doesn't effect your jump, is that acrobatics uses that single word in its description. The rules becomes less messy without it. If that word was missing then the only question to be asked for whether you get a jump bonus or penalty is: What is your current speed?
Otherwise you have: What is your base speed? Do you have ER going, which increases base speed? Or haste, which does not? Are you a barbarian who doesn't increase base speed, or a monk who does?
Which I'm confident is what the rules already are RAI, and RAW as well, except for individuals like yourself who don't see how loose the language is on this issue, and insist on a pedantic difference here.
Bonus round: Does Blessing of Fervor provide a jump bonus?
If I jump down a 200f pit with full plate and I'm affected by the spell slow does that mean I can only fall at 10f per round?You fall at 200 feet per round unless you have an umbrella in your hand - at which point you slow to 10 feet per round.You fall 500 feet the first round, and 1000 feet each round after.
Damage is capped at 20d6, but that doesn't mean you only fall 200 feet per round.
The slow is what's affecting the fall here - honestly you are acting like they had a jar of honey in their backpack or something.
I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers of +25 and -15 from. 90 - 30 = 60, or 6 increments of 10', giving +24 to jump checks.
I was thinking +5 per 10 feet - you know a nice easy number that makes the rule easy to apply. It was a mistake. The plus 5 turned into a minus five - because it was a mistake.
ER, increases base speed. But what is the reasoning it gives for improving jump?
Oh that's easy - it's not the part you quoted - it's this:
This spell increases your base land speed by 30 feet.
The only two places in the game that don't reference base speed are Haste and Slow. Oddly it's like they were bad examples given the fact that both spells have interacted badly with multiple mechanics that changed from 3.5 to Pathfinder - in other words ... like my first response - they are a mistake, and errata after errata have been and will be written to fix the holes in them until they put out a new edition.
Your going to have to provide a rules citation for this. As I've shown above, the rules explicitly say penalties stack unless they tell us otherwise
Sorry I my mind was a jumble writing that - what I should have said is bonuses and penalties from the same sources shouldn't stack. The source in this case is encumbrance - it already notes not to stack the penalties with armor check (use the worse) - I'd actually be fine with your entire position I think if you wanted to agree to something like this:
Use the worse of armor check/encumbrance/or movement penalties when making a jump check.
That makes sense - not stacking.
But let me give an example of multiple penalties interacting. If I'm slowed, my speed is halved. If I'm also in rough terrain, my speed is effectively quartered. Just because I'm limited to 15' of movement does not mean I get to ignore difficult terrain - it still costs me 10' of movement for each 5' of distance I cross.
Those are not penalties - those are costs - big difference.
Example:
Creatures with a base land speed below 30 feet receive a –4 racial bonus on Acrobatics checks made to jump for every 10 feet of their speed below 30 feet.
That's a penalty. If I wanted to make it a cost I would change it to this:
These DCs double if you do not have at least 10 feet of space to get a running start
That's a cost - you could also say that it takes 10 feet of movement for every 5 or something like that - there is a huge difference between a penalty and a cost.
Then we consider what is the penalty for being over encumbered? If you look at the chart - there isn't one listed. So we have several choices. There is no penalty (I hope you don't think this is the case since heavy encumbrance is -6). We just take the next step, at -9 (this is probably the best case scenario for the jumper the GM should consider). But, IMO, it should be infinite. Just like in real life, if you are so heavily loaded down you can barely move, and certainly can't jump, pathfinder should probably follow this. Just like we don't need a rule to tell us that dead characters can't take actions, I really hope we don't need a rule that tells us that characters that can barely move, CAN'T jump (or swim, or go rock climbing) - at least not without having that as one of their default forms of movement - e.g, a sea serpent loaded down, should still be able to swim 5'.
No - actually if you are wearing heavy armor with an armor check of -6 or more there is never an encumbrance penalty until you can't move. That's my point.
Don't argue RAW on one hand and then wax eloquently about RAI - I've admitted several times in this thread no one would ever give a flying crap about this argument at a table and it's silly on it's face - or in other words:
Of course - that's totally beyond the point, if your intent here was to convince me of something important I think you totally missed the entire reason for this conversation :)
Oh that's easy - it's not the part you quoted - it's this:This spell increases your base land speed by 30 feet.
Your missing the point.
As with any effect that increases your speed...
This feels like the argument about flanking being a melee only thing and the text from the gang-up feat which proves the general rule being ignored. (...and since flanking specifically refers to melee attacks... showed that flanking could only occur from melee). Some people continued to ignore that part of the FAQ as meaningless till the PDT came and specifically confirmed what everyone else already knew.
Another way of reading that sentence from ER is "Because increases to your speed increase your jumping ability, the (base) speed increase from ER also increases your jumping ability."
It says ANY increase to SPEED. Not any increase only from ER. Or any increase only when we are told so, but any, as in all, increases to speed.
The only two places in the game that don't reference base speed are Haste and Slow.
Challenge accepted :).
Core Rulebook
Ultimate Equipment
But quoted here
Speed: Medium or heavy armor slows the wearer down. The number in the Armor and Shields table is the character's speed while wearing the armor. Humans, elves, half-elves, and half-orcs have an unencumbered speed of 30 feet. They use the first column. Dwarves, gnomes, and halflings have an unencumbered speed of 20 feet. They use the second column. Remember, however, that a dwarf's land speed remains 20 feet even in medium or heavy armor or when carrying a medium or heavy load.
Dwarves, gnomes, and halflings have a speed of 20 feet (4 squares), or 15 feet (3 squares) when wearing medium or heavy armor (except for dwarves, who move 20 feet in any armor).Humans, elves, half-elves, half-orcs, and most humanoid monsters have a speed of 30 feet (6 squares), or 20 feet (4 squares) in medium or heavy armor.
Core Rulebook, on barbarians - another detail you keep conveniently ignoring.
Again the word base missing. Again showing that base speed and speed are used interchangeably in the rules. In fact base speed is also used synchronously with land speed throughout the rules, as you will find many entries like this:
Normal Speed: Undines have a base speed of 30 feet on land. They also have a swim speed of 30 feet, can move in water without making Swim checks, and always treat Swim as a class skill.
Which on a side note, ER would not increase an undine swim speed because it tells us it wouldn't, but haste and slow would. Which also goes back to base speed being synonymous with land speed fits with ER increasing land speed only.
And in addition to the spells haste and slow which you suggest are simply bad examples:
Burst of speed
And blessing of fervor already quoted above, which you've ignored.
Here is the entire search list
There are lots more references to speed without using the word base. There are also of course lots of references to base speed, almost all of them are in reference to a specific races land speed, as seen in the undine example. Creatures with more than one movement type always call out a base speed (for land), then a swim, climb, burrow, or fly speed as appropriate.
Question: Merfolk have a base speed of 5', and a swim speed of 50'. Do merfolk suffer a -8 to jump checks if they want to swim up to the surface and jump over a row boat?
Alternate question: Is a merfolks swim speed modified by heavy armor? Or encumbrance? Given swim speed is not base speed. They already have a base speed of 5' (which would of course be modified, and still be 5').
Don't argue RAW on one hand and then wax eloquently about RAI - I've admitted several times in this thread no one would ever give a flying crap about this argument at a table and it's silly on it's face - or in other words
When one side of an argument has a mismatch between RAW and RAI, and the other side has RAW and RAI matching, there is a very high degree of certainty with which we can say which one is correct. The problem is RAW on this is murky, as shown, because of all the things we've discussed. Why, why, why, would you ever insist the correct reading of RAW then is the one that does not fit RAI? That is the reason I talk about RAI here along with the RAW.
It's very clear to me that base speed is synonymous with land speed, and that it is frequently just referred to as speed in the rules. And when the rules don't mean land speed they carefully point out what type of speed it is. And because of that, it is clear to me that speed is speed is speed when talking about encumbrance, armor, and jumping.
Use the worse of armor check/encumbrance/or movement penalties when making a jump check.
I would have no objection to such a rule being added, but it currently does not exist. Therefore, currently, the penalties from encumbrance/armor and speed stack. Likewise, a bonus from high speed, and penalties from encumbrance, stack.
(I'd even be for a rule that changed the penalties to be equal in value combined with the above so you don't have to calculate each, then compare them).
The point is that when we read the rules, we should read them in whole, read them in context, and arrive at a conclusion from that. You may be to set in your viewpoint to change, but other readers will hopefully benefit from seeing how all these pieces come together to create a simple rule - your speed effects your ability to jump. Clean. Simple. Easy to remember.
Just some side thoughts:
I was thinking +5 per 10 feet - you know a nice easy number that makes the rule easy to apply. It was a mistake. The plus 5 turned into a minus five - because it was a mistake.
Your going to have to provide a rules citation for this. As I've shown above, the rules explicitly say penalties stack unless they tell us otherwiseSorry I my mind was a jumble writing that - what I should have said is bonuses and penalties from the same sources shouldn't stack.
No problem, I appreciate you clarifying these points.
Bonuses from the same source don't stack. Penalties do, unless told otherwise. E.g, Intimidate tells us it doesn't stack with other shaken effects.
But lets take another example. Does a dwarf, in heavy armor, affected by a slow spell, take the penalty from being slowed and the ACP? These are certainly different penalties. I see where you are saying that encumbrance provides two penalties in this case as the ultimate parent source for speed and ACP-like penalties - but such is the rules. They tied encumbrance to the armor penalties, and thus here we are. But again we are told armor and encumbrance do not stack with each other, the rules again tell us not to stack those two, but we are not told that speed penalties and ACP-like penalties don't stack.
Just some side thoughts:
Bonuses from the same source don't stack. Penalties do, unless told otherwise. E.g, Intimidate tells us it doesn't stack with other shaken effects.
So you are saying that a party comes across priests - bane is cast 3 times (no saves) you are saying the party now has -3 to attack and -3 to save vs fear....
Seriously?
I'm glad I don't play at your table.
Bonus Types: Usually, a bonus has a type that indicates how the spell grants the bonus. The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don't generally stack. With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus of a given type works (see Combining Magical Effects). The same principle applies to penalties—a character taking two or more penalties of the same type applies only the worst one, although most penalties have no type and thus always stack. Bonuses without a type always stack, unless they are from the same source.
totally leaving the jump argument aside - you are quite wrong on penalties.
In Russia, pit jumps you.
I'm pretty sure that by the end of 2018, the entire CRB will have been quoted in this thread. Page 208
Bonus Types: Usually, a bonus has a type that indicates how the spell grants the bonus. The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don't generally stack. With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus of a given type works (see Combining Magical Effects). The same principle applies to penalties—a character taking two or more penalties of the same type applies only the worst one, although most penalties have no type and thus always stack. Bonuses without a type always stack, unless they are from the same source.
Edit: for clarity...
"The same principle applies to penalties"..."Bonuses without a type always stack, unless they are from the same source"
Because the same principles that apply to bonuses apply to penalties, penalties from the same source do not stack.
Movement is an illusion. In actuality you can't actually move at all, all movement speeds are effectively zero. You also cannot jump over pits of any size at all.
I see you have been talking to Zeno.
I'm glad I don't play at your table.
Ah right, because when I've missed a detail in the rules, the best way to drive the point home is by being insulting? :)
Now let's just set that aside and ignore it.
Now, why don't you go back and answer the questions I've asked, about dwarves, and creatures with swim speeds (merfolk)? How do the rules play out for these creatures in your view?
I'm glad I don't play at your table.
Ah right, because when I've missed a detail in the rules, the best way to drive the point home is by being insulting? :)
Now let's just set that aside and ignore it.
Now, why don't you go back and answer the questions I've asked, about dwarves, and creatures with swim speeds (merfolk)? How do the rules play out for these creatures in your view?
Apologies - it was meant as a cheeky response - not insulting - re-reading it, perhaps the intent didn't translate as well as intended, if at all.
I will respond when I have time to, which is to say it will take more time than I have currently - but wanted to apologize first as that was more important.
Apologies - it was meant as a cheeky response - not insulting - re-reading it, perhaps the intent didn't translate as well as intended, if at all.
Accepted. Thank you.
Can we get the FAQ answer for this question like, pinned somewhere so that people don't have to scroll through 30 pages of this nonsense?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I googled "pathfinder 10 foot pit faq", so it's not impossible to find if you know how to use a search engine.
Or enter the Core Rulebook FAQ page, and search for "jump".
But I agree that it could be easier.
Another good suggestion is to do a people search for the PDT account then add one of their post to a list to bring them back up easier and then search their post for any keywords
Nice five year necro, and you are wrong.
The post immediately before yours referenced the pertinent faq.
|
The confusion coming in mostly due to Leap.
AoN Leap which specifically states you need to jump 15 feet to clear a 10 foot gap in its description.
However, to answer the question as presented in the title of the thread, there is no DC to Leap over a 10 foot pit. You can do it if your movement speed is at least 30 feet, or if you have Powerful Leap.
I know, I know, the OP went on to discuss long jumping a 10 ft pit, which seems better covered by the above FAQ.
Still, it doesn't help that Leap specifically says you need +5 feet to cover a gap.
Reckless: you are referencing 2e rules, not relevant.
The issue has been settled by faq since 2015.
I'm gunna start a tally of the number of incorrect necros in a row before we get a genuine new question or an actually new rules interaction discovery.
Define what you mean by genuine new question. Like a new post that is an actual question that has never been asked on these forums before? That might be difficult to prove as it may have been asked in the past using obtuse wording.
I can't make bets on how high the necro count gets without a clear understanding.
I'm gunna start a tally of the number of incorrect necros in a row before we get a genuine new question or an actually new rules interaction discovery.Define what you mean by genuine new question. Like a new post that is an actual question that has never been asked on these forums before? That might be difficult to prove as it may have been asked in the past using obtuse wording.
I can't make bets on how high the necro count gets without a clear understanding.
What is the sound of two hounds jumping?
If a lone kobold falls in a 10ft pit (after failing the jump check) and dies does it make a percieved sound?
I'm gunna start a tally of the number of incorrect necros in a row before we get a genuine new question or an actually new rules interaction discovery.Define what you mean by genuine new question. Like a new post that is an actual question that has never been asked on these forums before? That might be difficult to prove as it may have been asked in the past using obtuse wording.
I can't make bets on how high the necro count gets without a clear understanding.
Not covered in the thread that is being necro'd. Basically if a check if they bothered to read the whole thread after stumbling upon it from google or wherever and then after seeing that the thread doesn't answer or at least cover their specific question, they ask it.
Not covered in the thread that is being necro'd. Basically if a check if they bothered to read the whole thread after stumbling upon it from google or wherever and then after seeing that the thread doesn't answer or at least cover their specific question, they ask it.I'm gunna start a tally of the number of incorrect necros in a row before we get a genuine new question or an actually new rules interaction discovery.Define what you mean by genuine new question. Like a new post that is an actual question that has never been asked on these forums before? That might be difficult to prove as it may have been asked in the past using obtuse wording.
I can't make bets on how high the necro count gets without a clear understanding.
Ah got it. So not a new question for the forums as a whole, but a question for the specific necro'd thread.
In that case, I bet 5.