| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Apologies if this has been covered before, but for understandable reasons, it's not easy to search the forum for what people think about 'Balance' and get a relevant answer.
I'm looking at Uneven Ground and the Balance action of Acrobatics and finding a bit of a high-level conundrum. As written there is pretty much no way to establish an entire room with a uneven ground that can even be entered by characters untrained in Acrobatics while also giving any kind of challenge to those trained.
Obviously, this suggests that establishing most of all of an entire room as uneven ground is a non-starter, but I'm converting a 1e AP, so I absolve myself of that solution. On that same note, I'm aware that flight is much more common at this level, rendering the point moot, but I still want to establish a ground rule (heh) for those going on-foot.
Presently my solution is that there are two 'types' of uneven ground in the room (in addition to the acid water)--a handful of areas with a sub-20 DC that is difficult but not impossible for untrained characters to manoeuvre, and some areas with a level-appropriate (mid-30's) DC that will reward those with the skill investment by opening up manoevring opportunities.
That said, I suppose the core of my issue is that the rules are pretty much silent on a variety of scenarios involving "What happens if you try to enter uneven ground without using the Balance action?"
I've already seen the thread discussing the confusion behind needing to start a Balance action already on uneven ground, so that's not so much where I get hung up. For me the issue is that if you stride or even leap into uneven ground (perhaps a patch of obscured ice), you are rather left hanging with how you interpret the line, "or risk falling prone or even injuring yourself".
Strictly as-written there I can see two obvious interpretations:
1) You simply cannot enter uneven ground without attempting an Acrobatics check, meaning that if you are untrained and the DC is high enough, you cannot do better than losing your action.
2) It is possible to boldly march into uneven ground and take the risk... which must be ad hoc'd by the GM.
Considering that my above example included the possibility that somebody might Leap into a square they did not realise was uneven, I feel like the latter must be more fitting.
Fortunately we are not entirely without recourse--the line about making a Reflex save if struck while on uneven ground suggests it might be possible to co-opt Reflex as a more universally applicable stat for those who are not skilled. The only issue is now ensuring that 'Stride plus Reflex' doesn't simply invalidate those who invested in Acrobatics and use the appropriate action.
For this purpose I propose a reaction on the same tenor as Grab a Ledge. If you, while moving by other means, enter or move through uneven ground, you may spend your reaction to stabilize yourself with a Reflex save. Furthermore, to highlight the utility of spending the action to Balance, the Reflex is a binary "Half speed/Fall" with no chance to recover on a regular failure, as the Balance action has.
Thoughts?
I've always viewed the 'risk falling prone or even injuring yourself' part to refer to the other aspects of what uneven ground is.
A good example would be two swashbuckling pirates fighting on a yard arm above the ship's deck. If they fail their balance check, they get to sway like Jack Sparrow on a bender for an action while they regain balance, and if they crit fail their Balance check, it's 40' to the deck below, or 60' to an inpromptu bath.
Another would be fighting during an earthquake, which could cause extra damage if you were to lose your balance during it and end up bouncing on shaking ground face first.
A Reflex save isn't really appropriate for this sort of check, though it might be useful in dealing with the consequences, like Grabbing a Ledge to catch the yard arm or the rope if the swashbuckler falls, or finding a way to brace themselves if they fall in an earthquake.
As for the Balance check itself, a creative party will find ways to swing it in their favour, like a skilled Acrobat taking a rope across an unstable area to allow those less skilled to cross with both a rope to help support them and, depending how bad the worst member is at keeping their feet, Follow the Leader to guide them across.
The Balance check is used for exactly what it says on the tin. If the character knows that they aren't that steady on their feet, they need to think their way around the problem with the tools they have available. That's the challenge of having to deal with terrain encounters.
i think strictly replacing reflex for acrobatics checks massively undervalues acrobatics as a skill.
Oh, of course, I agree with you. That is why I did not propose to replace Acrobatics with Reflex. I offered a vastly more costly alternative that uses Reflex while ensuring that the Balance action as written remains the most effective way to cross uneven ground. (Incidentally, it would only be possible to use my above-proposed method once in a given round, severely limiting its utility)
I'm not proposing anything so extreme as allowing players to bypass Climb checks with a Fort save. Naturally, one has to Climb to ascend near-vertical surfaces, but while it is pretty well improbable that a character would scale a wall without climbing, it is far less difficult to imagine a character attempt to walk across ice or deep sand without preparing to Balance.
More to the point, when it comes to crossing an otherwise horizontal surface that constitutes uneven ground without having taken a Balance action to prepare themselves, the rules lack any specific consequences beyond the risk of falling. In general a character cannot ascend a wall without climbing, and the consequences for not taking the appropriate skill action are obvious. Meanwhile, a character may well try walk onto ice without balancing, and it is left entirely up to the GM to adjudicate whether they fall and/or hurt themselves (and how much).
Even if the line were changed to be, "you need to Balance or fall," (guaranteed) or, "you need to Balance or risk falling depending on the nature of the terrain," (specific rubric) it would be much less ambiguous. As written it sounds like you have a chance to successfully navigate any uneven ground without balancing based on entirely un-described factors.
I just found it strange that there's no unambiguous answer for "What happens if I don't" when it comes to attempting to cross any of these types of terrain by any of the various movement actions that aren't tied to a skill which not all characters will have:
Examples of Uneven Ground
-Piles of deep, loose sand, snow, and ash
-Ice
-Rough sections of worn flagstones and cobblestones, rough cavern floors
-Piles of rubble
-Shoddy stairs
-Twisting roots
In any case, I think I have resolved that the room in question (completely covered in slick slime that requires an Acrobatics check to move half-speed on, according to the adventure) will simply feature two different DCs of uneven ground, one that is effortless to half the party, and one that only those trained in acrobatics can attempt, to further reward their skill with enhanced mobility options. When the first character has to jump from one platform to another... Well there's still no action to Balance while Leaping.
I'm ok with only a handful of characters being able to handle high level uneven terrain.
I would leave it uneven terrain as low level and not work it into an adventure if the majority of the party couldn't operate on it. Such devices should never really be used if they impede combat much. This was the case even in old editions of D&D.
If you're not a highly trained dexterity character, you just won't be able to handle really bad uneven terrain. If you are a highly trained dex character, then common uneven terrain should be trivial for you.
I think the answer's pretty straightforward: They attempt to balance (with adjustments made as per that other thread you mentioned!) and those w/o Acrobatics often fail. They may have to Crawl to get anywhere, and it'll be hard much like a guy in full plate might have to outrun a boulder. Adventures can (and IMO should) take you anywhere and require a breadth of ability, w/ mobility being right up there after offense and defense in importance (along w/ maybe social skills, depending on campaign).
Sounds like those players left a gaping hole in their abilities. One either needs Acrobatics to navigate dubious ground or Acrobatics to fly well. It's in the must-have category, though Untrained Improvisation can do most of the work for you. The DCs are generally easy for higher level PCs at least in combat when it's flavor and not directly from an enemy's effect. So one doesn't need Dex. It's a shame when window dressing, i.e. rubble in ruins or a ship riding waves, becomes an actual obstacle because your veteran hero can't walk well.
Reminds me of a PF1 module where the mid-high level PCs are trapped in force walls, bombarded by magic, and subject to wind effects. Sure most PCs would have access to flying at that point (being PFS w/ wealthy PCs), but which ones had enough skill to fly successfully in that wind? (Most of them it turned out when I ran it, since they were veterans who'd learned the importance of Fly.) I could see somebody building a high-level PC from scratch overlooking Acrobatics (or Untrained Improvisation), but I'd think in normal play most players would see its importance.
Somewhat ironically to expectation, the character in full plate is actually one of the trained acrobats and also flyers. The two least armoured members, the sorcerer and mountain stance monk are the ones who will be unable to move.
The part that seems to be the crux of my issue is that in almost every other case where the whole party might be challenged regardless of their skill investment, the ability to bypass that has been moved off skills to universal abilities. All social skills target Will or Perception, falling from a ledge uses Reflex, and Perception has straight up become a core ability. In general it has been a design philosophy of 2e that characters always have an non-skill option to avoid circumstances which they might be forced into, and skills only provide more effective alternatives (once again, this is not the same as Athletics since scaling walls are not the same as walking on ice with regards to the likelihood a character will be forced to attempt by factors beyond their control).
I suppose this really only reinforces the idea that rooms should never be designed with more than small patches of uneven ground to provide interesting terrain, at least not in circumstances where Follow the Expert cannot function. This is particularly true given that a smooth sheet of ice is listed as an example of DC 30 Acrobatics check.
Either way, I think I have a clearer understanding of the corner cases involving uneven ground and how it should (and shouldn't) be used.
Its just a artifact of the system where you add proficiency to everything except untrained skills. If the game demands a particular skill to pass from mid level it can be an impossible challenge. Sure there are ways around some of these, like follow the leader, but that is not the point.
The converse of this situation is where your untrained barbaian keeps making Arcanca rolls, because you have a flat system and he is lucky.
Its annoying because the system already has the ability to handle this. Certain skill actions are limited to trained only, certain skill feats have requirements of expert. So they have the mechanism there to restrict inappropraiate actions already.
They should be adding proficiency to level for untrained skills.
Somewhat ironically to expectation, the character in full plate is actually one of the trained acrobats and also flyers. The two least armoured members, the sorcerer and mountain stance monk are the ones who will be unable to move.
The part that seems to be the crux of my issue is that in almost every other case where the whole party might be challenged regardless of their skill investment, the ability to bypass that has been moved off skills to universal abilities. All social skills target Will or Perception, falling from a ledge uses Reflex, and Perception has straight up become a core ability. In general it has been a design philosophy of 2e that characters always have an non-skill option to avoid circumstances which they might be forced into, and skills only provide more effective alternatives (once again, this is not the same as Athletics since scaling walls are not the same as walking on ice with regards to the likelihood a character will be forced to attempt by factors beyond their control).
I suppose this really only reinforces the idea that rooms should never be designed with more than small patches of uneven ground to provide interesting terrain, at least not in circumstances where Follow the Expert cannot function. This is particularly true given that a smooth sheet of ice is listed as an example of DC 30 Acrobatics check.
Either way, I think I have a clearer understanding of the corner cases involving uneven ground and how it should (and shouldn't) be used.
You could use the gamemastery guide variation that that only uses proficiency without level, so you have a less wide variation in ability. Some have found this a good option when you don't want the wide gap in ability that level-based proficiency causes. It might be an interesting option for you to look into.
They should be adding proficiency to level for untrained skills.
Interestingly, that was how the initial version of the PF2 playtest worked. Level was removed from proficiency for untrained skills because it caused inability to have characters that were actually ineffective at skills.
As for the problem of being unable to set a DC that works for both characters trained in a skill and those not trained in the skill, it depends on whether the challenge is part of a combat challenge or just a skill challenge.
If it is an out-of-combat skill challenge, then follow the expert would work fine for this. Assuming that at least one of the players is expert in Acrobatics. Otherwise that won't be an option. Also, a Victory Point minigame instead of a pass/fail skill check may work nicely for out-of-combat.
For in-combat or no-expert scenarios, just make sure that the penalties for failing the checks are not career ending. You can still fight while prone, for example.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They should be adding proficiency to level for untrained skills.Interestingly, that was how the initial version of the PF2 playtest worked. Level was removed from proficiency for untrained skills because it caused inability to have characters that were actually ineffective at skills.
Yes but they screwed it up by having to smaller bonus for being trained, and they didn't limit the right skill checks to being trained.
It was prety obvious that leaving a scaling +1 to +20 in the game was going to cause problems, and it does| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You could use the gamemastery guide variation that that only uses proficiency without level, so you have a less wide variation in ability. Some have found this a good option when you don't want the wide gap in ability that level-based proficiency causes. It might be an interesting option for you to look into.
For me the apparent downsides of going without proficiency (minion swarms more dangerous, bosses less) seem to outweigh the benefits. It's not really the proficiency system itself which is causing me grief, it's the terrain rules. For pretty much every other activity involving navigating your environment, there's a clear distinction between "Anybody can or might be forced to do this" and "This requires a skill to opt-in."
Climbing walls, following tracks, vaulting gaps, and moving undetected all have a clear point to opting-in, where breaking out of restraints, searching for traps/treasure, and grabbing onto ledges are universal needs (with some overlap in low-DC untrained uses). I just figured that being able to stand up on ice qualified as something which could have both a basic means and a full-on skill check (a la Leap vs. Jump, or the various means of Escape). Certainly it seems plausible since remaining upright while already standing on uneven ground is a universal function that keys off Reflex, and not the Acrobatics skill you needed to get into that situation in the first place.
On some level it feels like there was meant to be a secondary means of manoeuvring uneven ground but it got removed or never finished, leaving us with the 'risk falling' phrasing with no means of resolving that risk that had been driving me to distraction above.
It's annoying because the system already has the ability to handle this. Certain skill actions are limited to trained only, certain skill feats have requirements of expert. So they have the mechanism there to restrict inappropriate actions already.
As a fan of the way untrained proficiency scaled with you in the playtest, I'm kind of with you on this. In fact, probably the only reason why I haven't houseruled it back in yet (we started this campaign during the playtest, converting over to full rules once they were published) is that one of my players took Clever Improviser, and I wanted to get a feel for the rules as written before I started modifying them.
(actually tangentially on-topic, I'm very pleased to see that one of the house rules I did find necessary is now enshrined in the GMG; the 'splitting and combining movement' which is the focus of the other thread on Balancing)
...
Fighting my instincts to add a summary and conclusion to this post but I would just be reiterating my last post. "Uneven ground should be considered a sometimes terrain most of the time, and if you ever need the whole party to deal with it, give it a low DC regardless what level you are so your Acrobatics peeps can feel even cooler than they already do by critting every check to move around the room. Also probably don't let people Leap into uneven ground?"
You could use the gamemastery guide variation that that only uses proficiency without level, so you have a less wide variation in ability. Some have found this a good option when you don't want the wide gap in ability that level-based proficiency causes. It might be an interesting option for you to look into.For me the apparent downsides of going without proficiency (minion swarms more dangerous, bosses less) seem to outweigh the benefits. It's not really the proficiency system itself which is causing me grief, it's the terrain rules. For pretty much every other activity involving navigating your environment, there's a clear distinction between "Anybody can or might be forced to do this" and "This requires a skill to opt-in."
Climbing walls, following tracks, vaulting gaps, and moving undetected all have a clear point to opting-in, where breaking out of restraints, searching for traps/treasure, and grabbing onto ledges are universal needs (with some overlap in low-DC untrained uses). I just figured that being able to stand up on ice qualified as something which could have both a basic means and a full-on skill check (a la Leap vs. Jump, or the various means of Escape). Certainly it seems plausible since remaining upright while already standing on uneven ground is a universal function that keys off Reflex, and not the Acrobatics skill you needed to get into that situation in the first place.
On some level it feels like there was meant to be a secondary means of manoeuvring uneven ground but it got removed or never finished, leaving us with the 'risk falling' phrasing with no means of resolving that risk that had been driving me to distraction above.
It's annoying because the system already has the ability to handle this. Certain skill actions are limited to trained only, certain skill feats have requirements of expert. So they have the mechanism there to restrict inappropriate actions already.As a fan of the way untrained...
I haven't had this problem. Every single character I make gets Acrobatics given how many skills and means to get skills you have access to. Acrobatics is good for casters and martials. It's always a good skill to take. Not sure why your players aren't taking it since it is necessary for flight, grabbing a ledge, balancing, and escaping.
Acrobatics is one of the better means for a caster to have a good option to escape. I feel like your players are setting themselves up for problems not taking Acrobatics.
Maybe mention this to them. It's a super useful skill to have and Dexterity is a high value statistic for martials and casters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not sure why your players aren't taking it since it is necessary for flight, grabbing a ledge, balancing, and escaping.
This is not entirely accurate. Acrobatics is not actually necessary for standard flight any more than it is for walking, it is entirely unnecessary for Grabbing an Edge (that's Reflex), and the only time when Acrobatics becomes useful for Escaping is if it happens to have higher proficiency than one's strikes, which progress automatically. Acrobatics certainly is necessary to be able to perform manoeuvres in flight and it does offer a more reliable means of Escape for those with poor weapon proficiency if one invests at least Expert, then Master in it, but the only example where Acrobatics is truly necessary here is to Balance across uneven or narrow terrain, such as smooth ice's DC 30.
Once again, the core of my point is that I did not assume that a skill should be necessary to have a chance at all with this type of terrain. Signs point that this was an incorrect assumption. That aside, if a skill is so necessary or useful that it becomes a must-take for every character, then it is poorly designed or should be made into a core ability, like Perception was in the edition change. Whether it is easy to pick up training in Acrobatics is a wholly different question from whether taking it should be necessary for all characters.
Don't imagine that my players have been negligent in their character creation, undervaluing their Acrobatics skill. 3/5 characters are at least trained, including the heavily armoured Champion and the tengu Cleric, the latter of whom is a master to facilitate his ability to grow wings. Nevertheless, the solution for "What happens when untrained characters need to interact with high-DC Balance checks" should not be "They should have known better than to not-take an optional ability".
More viable answers are and have been in this thread, "High-DC Balance checks should not be mandatory to participate in a combat" (encounter design), "Untrained proficiency should not exclude level" (variant rule), or my original proposition, which I am no longer attached to (homebrew mechanics). Blaming players for elements of game or encounter design which prevent them from being able to play based on circumstances that have only now come up once in 15 levels of play seems counterproductive to identifying the actual issue at play.
For clarity, I believe the actual issue at play was my own assumption that the DC for crossing this room should be set to something level-appropriately high to challenge the 3 trained acrobats, when more realistically it should clearly be something which said acrobats can crit in their sleep while the other characters cope with their lack of skill or choose to engage alternative means.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Examples of Uneven Ground
-Piles of deep, loose sand, snow, and ash
-Ice
-Rough sections of worn flagstones and cobblestones, rough cavern floors
-Piles of rubble
-Shoddy stairs
-Twisting roots
I remember playing on uneven ground as a child. The town of Caseville, Michigan, had a breakwater made of two-foot-wide boulders with flat faces. The faces were not level. Fishermen would walk out onto this pier stepping past the more tilted faces, but as a 6-year-old I made progress by climbing and leaping. I thought it was fun and was disappointed when the town put a flat concrete sidewalk on the breakwater.
And of course, Michigan gave lots of experience in walking on ice every winter. And the beach was loose sand out of reach of the waves, but really only the sand dunes were hard to walk on.
I also used uneven ground in my game for fording a river.
I viewed such terrain as part of life. And Dexterity is my dump stat.
Uneven terrain with a DC more than 20, the value given for deep, loose gravel, is hard to imagine. I suppose a floor covered with marbles or a suspended rope net could manage DC 30.
For movement, the acrobatically untrained could move by Leaping. They would Stand, Leap, fall prone at the end of a leap because I would give DC 20 Acrobatics check for landing on one's feet, and Stand. Or Crawl, Crawl, and Crawl. This would be undignified but fine for just crossing the terrain. Combat in such terrain would be another matter.
The acrobatically trained could cross easily, with an occasional bad roll costing them their footing. The room does not need to challenge them; rather, the challenge would be in aiding their less acrobatic teammates.
You could just make it so anyone not able to make the DC check moves across as though it were difficult terrain or greater difficult terrain to simulate extremely slow and careful movement, while the dexterous character can go much quicker. Sort of like Legolas running across the snow in Lord of the Rings and the others having to dig their way through.
Examples of Uneven Ground
-Piles of deep, loose sand, snow, and ash
-Ice
-Rough sections of worn flagstones and cobblestones, rough cavern floors
-Piles of rubble
-Shoddy stairs
-Twisting rootsI remember playing on uneven ground as a child. The town of Caseville, Michigan, had a breakwater made of two-foot-wide boulders with flat faces. The faces were not level. Fishermen would walk out onto this pier stepping past the more tilted faces, but as a 6-year-old I made progress by climbing and leaping. I thought it was fun and was disappointed when the town put a flat concrete sidewalk on the breakwater.
And of course, Michigan gave lots of experience in walking on ice every winter. And the beach was loose sand out of reach of the waves, but really only the sand dunes were hard to walk on.
Indeed, growing up in Canada is one of the reasons I found it a little surprising that one needed to hit a DC 30 to move at all on 'smooth ice' without falling. I must wonder how smooth the ice must be that one needs to be at least level 3 and an expert acrobat to have a chance beyond a nat20 on that ice! Perhaps I have never encountered such in my mundane life... At least without falling.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the best way to handle this situation as a Gm is to not have the whole room have exactly the same terrain in it. Make a lot of it greater difficult terrain that can be moved across more delicately with balancing, and if people want to jump, definitely give then a DC to land, but let them use either athletics or acrobatics for the landing, being more about brute force or finesse. Have some paths that can only be crossed with balancing and others that could be climbed around, or let nature or survival checks reduce the DC for finding a better route.
I get that the real underlying issue here is that you feel like the balance action is needlessly restricted to only acrobatics, and that there is no default move across at an incredibly slow speed option built into it, but I think that is because there is supposed to be some terrain that you really cant get across otherwise. The key is just to limit that to very specific situations and to only use it when it would be fun for everyone. Not as just a block to advancement.
So I guess, I think the balance activity is really not supposed to be only activity for handling any kind of slippery or uneven terrain, but it is supposed to be the only activity for handling some kinds of slippery or uneven or narrow terrain.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I haven't had this problem. Every single character I make gets Acrobatics given how many skills and means to get skills you have access to. Acrobatics is good for casters and martials. It's always a good skill to take. Not sure why your players aren't taking it since it is necessary for flight, grabbing a ledge, balancing, and escaping.
I mean, if you feel the need to take the skill on every single character no matter what it sounds like you have run into that problem and you're just dealing with it as best you can within the rules.
but I think that is because there is supposed to be some terrain that you really cant get across otherwise.
What kind of terrain do you envision there?
Because while I sort of get the sentiment, it feels weird to imagine ... uneven flagstones or root networks sticking out of the dirt for instance as effectively impassable terrain.
I was thinking something like a tight rope would be a balance only terrain type.
I think the best way to handle this situation as a Gm is to not have the whole room have exactly the same terrain in it.
This in a line is pretty well exactly my conclusion, however I did not design the adventure. In the name of full disclosure, the room as written is not purely slime covered terrain which requires a Balance check. There is also acidic water which the adventure wants to treat as quicksand. In the interest of reducing the number of mechanics to track in one room I gave actually indeed converted the water to Gr. Difficult Terrain.
As an aside, strictly speaking I am fine with Balance being Acro-only--I merely expected to find some means which non-acrobats could use, preferably one which was far less efficient or safe to preserve the value of having the training.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I haven't had this problem. Every single character I make gets Acrobatics given how many skills and means to get skills you have access to. Acrobatics is good for casters and martials. It's always a good skill to take. Not sure why your players aren't taking it since it is necessary for flight, grabbing a ledge, balancing, and escaping.I mean, if you feel the need to take the skill on every single character no matter what it sounds like you have run into that problem and you're just dealing with it as best you can within the rules.
but I think that is because there is supposed to be some terrain that you really cant get across otherwise.What kind of terrain do you envision there?
Because while I sort of get the sentiment, it feels weird to imagine ... uneven flagstones or root networks sticking out of the dirt for instance as effectively impassable terrain.
I take it on every single character because it's easy to do and useful. Not because it is required. I could play without it, but why? Between backgrounds, multiclass dedications, and the base number of skills you get, it's pretty easy to take nearly every useful skill there is.
I usually take Stealth and Acrobatics. If I have an extra unused skill, I toss on Athletics. Along with the usual base skills like Arcana, Religion, or Occultism for a caster.
I haven't run into problems where I need it. I just like to have the skills. Acrobatics and Stealth encompass a variety of useful skills that are valuable to any type of character.