D&D 5E Swimming in Armor

[The Old Crow]

Did you miss the entire discussion of the desire to make water an actual consideration and possible hazard? If swimming is automatic in every situation, then that takes a great deal of interest and variety out of combat encounters.

According to RAW, swimming is automatic unless the DM indicates otherwise. I'm indicating otherwise because it makes combat on a boat, with the bad guys trying to throw you overboard, interesting.

Making wearing heavy armor more hazardous for those who wear heavy armor makes wearing heavy armor more hazardous for those who wear heavy armor. For water to be hazard, I would consider currents that push in directions the swimmer does not want to go, whirlpools that suck them down, hidden sharp rocks, difficult terrain like weeds, poor visibility like weeds or silt, icy temperature, creatures that grapple and pull adventures or innocents under, nets, paralysis, or the panicked traveller who actually doesn't know how to swim and needs to be rescued.

 

[Vulf]

Navy Seals don't wear gambesons with metal armouror and swing swords underwater. True story.

If that were true, Atlantis would have taken over the world by now. Just because the information is classified doesn't give you an excuse to deny the SEALS the honor they earn when they spear a merman for freedom.

 

[LordEntrails]

Is that a DC 12 check to swim?

I would have thought swimming would be automatic. Unless you were in heavy armor was a ridiculously strong current in which case you might need to check.

Again, as stated numerous times up thread, many people, myself included, feel that swimming in other than calm water should not be automatic. To quote the PHB, pg 175; "You struggle to swim or stay afloat in treacherous currents,..."
What defines treacherous? Up to the DM. I understand that.

Again, a liberal reading of RAW indicates that every player can swim regardless. RAW also indicates it is up to the DM to determine what a difficult situation is; "Your Strength (Athletics) check covers
difficult situations you encounter while climbing, jumping, or swimming."

If for you having combat on a boat and being thrown overboard and having it become a hazard is not fun for you and your party, then use the liberal interpretation of RAW and your knight carrying a backpack with 200 pounds of lead swims automatically and can grab onto the side of the boat and lift himself back in without a problem.

On the other hand, if it might be fun for you to throw in the possibility of struggle, where the mage with a strength of 6 and in heavy cotton robes might have to be thrown a rope to get back on board, then, liberal RAW isn't going to do that for you.

Making wearing heavy armor more hazardous for those who wear heavy armor makes wearing heavy armor more hazardous for those who wear heavy armor.

Is this horse dead yet? It's been beat pretty thoroughly now. Heavy armor isn't the only consideration that is being suggested.

For water to be hazard, I would consider currents that push in directions the swimmer does not want to go, whirlpools that suck them down, hidden sharp rocks, difficult terrain like weeds, poor visibility like weeds or silt, icy temperature, creatures that grapple and pull adventures or innocents under, nets, paralysis, or the panicked traveller who actually doesn't know how to swim and needs to be rescued.

See the response above to Flamestrike.

As for the Navy Seals, none of the rulings being discussed now would prevent them from being the heroes they are portrayed as.

 

[Oofta]

I think part of the issue with swimming is that in general it's approached as a "Save or Die" roll which 5E (in theory) tries to get away from.

Or with several DMs it's been "If you are wearing armor don't bother rolling because you just die".

Which is really exciting for the guy wearing armor. Either you take a significant penalty to effectiveness compared to every other build when it comes to ship-based adventures or when you're close to anything deeper than a mud puddle because you took off your armor or you risk death around every corner. While the naked barbarian is somehow deflecting every sword blow with their pecs.

Maybe I'm just bitter, but I've had DMs who seemingly hated characters that wore armor. Like the time the DM had the bad guy do a command word "jump" and then insisted that my character move 10 feet and jump over the edge of the ship into the ocean.

If the barbarian can shrug off getting hit in the face with an ogre's spiked club and suffer no damage because he's just that tough (and added his con bonus to AC), then my guy in armor can swim as well as anyone else that hasn't stripped down. Because D&D does not have to be realistic, and save or die sucks.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

 

[LordEntrails]

I think part of the issue with swimming is that in general it's approached as a "Save or Die" roll which 5E (in theory) tries to get away from.

Or with several DMs it's been "If you are wearing armor don't bother rolling because you just die".

...

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

But I'm trying not to do any of that!

I get it, but it sounds like you (and others) are responding emotionally and not with careful consideration. THAT said, I don't mean that in a negative way. Games are fun, fun is emotional. Emotional reasons are good and valid.

One thing that I have not addressed is the "Save or Die" problem. To me, a failed save does not mean die. Not when swimming. It means you don't move, maybe it means you sink. But then as others pointed out, you still have dozens of rounds of breath holding to have something else happen (I think someone calculated 44 rounds if your Con is 18).

That's lots of saving throws, lots or rounds to do something even if you do sink.

(Or, as some you don't sink just because you fail, it means you just don't move unless you fail by enough.)

 

[Uller]

It definitely shouldn't be a "save or die" situation and it doesn't sound llike that is what LordEntrails is looking for. Falling into water is a setback to be overcome. The 5e rules for drowning make it pretty tough to drown. Can't speak for others here, but in my games it is never a "make the check or sink and never get another chance".

 

[Oofta]

But I'm trying not to do any of that!

I get it, but it sounds like you (and others) are responding emotionally and not with careful consideration. THAT said, I don't mean that in a negative way. Games are fun, fun is emotional. Emotional reasons are good and valid.

One thing that I have not addressed is the "Save or Die" problem. To me, a failed save does not mean die. Not when swimming. It means you don't move, maybe it means you sink. But then as others pointed out, you still have dozens of rounds of breath holding to have something else happen (I think someone calculated 44 rounds if your Con is 18).

That's lots of saving throws, lots or rounds to do something even if you do sink.

(Or, as some you don't sink just because you fail, it means you just don't move unless you fail by enough.)

Sorry, didn't mean to pick on you! It's just in the past it's always been "you're in armor, on a ship (even if docked) therefore you will end up on the bottom of the ocean, don't even bother trying to swim". Pretty much every time. Fortunately the last time it happened, I was playing a warforged and could just walk the several miles back to port. So it's kind of a pet peeve.

 

[Flamestrike]

Again, as stated numerous times up thread, many people, myself included, feel that swimming in other than calm water should not be automatic. To quote the PHB, pg 175; "You struggle to swim or stay afloat in treacherous currents,..."
What defines treacherous? Up to the DM. I understand that.

I dont know where you live mate, but I'm Australian and we spend a bit of time in the water.

A DC 12 check to swim means that 55 percent of 'ordinary men' (read commoners like you and I) drown when in the surf. If you want to kill your average 20th level Wizard, just push him in a river.

Dont get me wrong; the surf can be a lot more treacherous than many people imagine (a lot of people do get into trouble swimming out too far, then they get caught in the undertow pulling them further out into the ocean, and suddenly realise they arent in a pool and cant swim 2m to the edge to save themselves, they now need to swim 100m plus to solid ground against a current that is pulling them futher out to sea every second. They fight the current, tire quickly, and get into some very serious trouble in a very short period of time).

But DC 12 is crazy. You would need thousands of surf lifesavers on every 100m of beach to stop people from drowning.

The DC for 'Swimming' should be the same DC for 'Climbing a rope or tree' i.e: 'Automatic success - dont roll.'

If a PC was swimming in serious surf, with a tow/ undercurrent, then I might require a check (with a lower DC than 12 most likely DC 10). Or if he was trying to swim in heavy gear (armor) in calmer waters.

 

[LordEntrails]

...
The DC for 'Swimming' should be the same DC for 'Climbing a rope or tree' i.e: 'Automatic success - dont roll.'

If a PC was swimming in serious surf, with a tow/ undercurrent, then I might require a check (with a lower DC than 12 most likely DC 10). Or if he was trying to swim in heavy gear (armor) in calmer waters.

Great, then as stated, since you don't see or want water to be an a complication in combat, then I don't see how you have any thing else of value to add to this discussion.

I don't mean that to sound harsh. But I've stated multiple times my intent. And having water add nothing to a combat is not of interest to me.

I'm looking to increase fun, challenge, and mix things up. Not make everything so simple that every fight is just a game of attrition.

 

[LordEntrails]

Let me also add, if it take a character 20-45 rounds to asphyxiate, that means you have to fail 20-45 CONSECUTIVE saves. So a 55% chance of failing any ONE save means you have what? a 1% or 0.01% chance of drowning? All you have to do is make one save and you can then fail another 19+ before it's a problem.

Think about this, THIS IS NOT A SAVE OR DIE situation. This is a you have 20+ chances to save OR DO SOMETHING CREATIVE or die situation.

Failing one save does not mean you drown. If a player and their buddies can not think of something to do in 19 rounds (when most combats last ~6!) then they need more help than I care to give them.

Think about what I am saying and stop jumping up with some knee-jerk reaction. Please!