D&D 5E The Magical Martial

[Chaosmancer]

Then my apologies, it wasn't necessarily intended to be directed at you, more towards the point of "we don't need clear rules". Skill checks are a great weakness for D&D, one of the reason it appears to be almost entirely combat focused, and a limiting factor on fulfilling the non-caster fantasy. Expanding expertise to make it explicitly beyond human capability would help.

Agreed.

The only problem with it as a solution, is that magical classes get access to the same skill system, but I often... well... I cheat a little bit. I'll make sure to tell the fighter or barbarian about what physical capabilities their numbers translate to, but I won't tell the wizard or the druid. I'll let them do it if they ask, but so far... none of them do.

This is why I'm so convinced of the power of placing these things where players can see them. Because just telling the player "you know, you are strong enough to shatter a table with a single punch" immediately gets them thinking on how to use that strength, while a caster with almost the same strength never puts it together (unless they have the exact same strength)

And, to put my money where my mouth is... some rules I've implemented.

Spoiler: Lifting and pulling

First number is minimum lift
Strength score^X determined by size.

• Tiny^1
• Small^1.5
• Medium ^2
• Large^2.5
• Huge^3
• Gargantuan^3.5

Second number is maximum lift/push/drag, First score x 2

Lifting More
You may attempt to Lift/Push/Drag more with the following Athletics rolls
DC 15 = Maximum Lift/Push/Drag x 1.25
DC 20 = Maximum Lift/Push/Drag x 1.50
DC 25 = Maximum Lift/Push/Drag x 2.00

Spoiler: Pushing yourself (designed to deal with kiting and everyone having the same speed)

This was very vague, as it was come up with on the fly, and I haven't st down and crunched numbers

As a free action (meaning it costs nothing from your round) you can roll an Athletics check using Strength or Dex.

DC 15 = you can move an additional 5 ft.
With every 5 points of DC increasing the distance by 5ft
If you are using your action to Dash, double those feet.

You get a number of "charges" during a fight or scene equal to your Con modifier for "free". After that, using this might result in exhaustion or maybe even hp loss.

Also, this is not without risk. If your total result is between 10 and 15, you waste it.
If what you roll on the die is a 1, 2 or 3 or your total result is less than 10 you gain a level of exhaustion, maybe hp loss.

I looked for jumping rules, but can't find them right now.

 

[GrimCo]

Well, we have general rules about what is considered easy, medium and hard dc. So it's up to Dm to decide how difficult it would be for character to do what player wants to do. Its in line with "rulings not rules" design. We do have rules. You roll d20 and add proficiency plus stat mod (or just stat mod) and maybe have advantage/disadvantage based on circumstances. Skill checks are more art than science. You feel what would be apropriate in given situation. And baseline is our knowledge and experience in how world works. FE we know that swiming in full plate is extremly hard. So if pc wants to swim over calm little river, they would have to roll.

Magic explicitly bends or brakes reality. Thats why there are detailed description of spells. They have more or less precise wording on scope of reality bending it can do.

 

[MuhVerisimilitude]

Well, we have general rules about what is considered easy, medium and hard dc. So it's up to Dm to decide how difficult it would be for character to do what player wants to do. Its in line with "rulings not rules" design. We do have rules. You roll d20 and add proficiency plus stat mod (or just stat mod) and maybe have advantage/disadvantage based on circumstances. Skill checks are more art than science. You feel what would be apropriate in given situation. And baseline is our knowledge and experience in how world works. FE we know that swiming in full plate is extremly hard. So if pc wants to swim over calm little river, they would have to roll.

Magic explicitly bends or brakes reality. Thats why there are detailed description of spells. They have more or less precise wording on scope of reality bending it can do.

None of the above is, of course, at all necessary. It's just justification for why magic must be superior.

 

[Gammadoodler]

None of the above is, of course, at all necessary. It's just justification for why magic must be superior.

And also..really weird..

That spells come in two flavors...

1. Completely impossible, and
2. Automatic

Is truly bizarre to me.

 

[GrimCo]

None of the above is, of course, at all necessary. It's just justification for why magic must be superior.

Magic is superior. It's fantasy's version of technology. In settings like Shadowrun, magic and tech are on par. Most of things mages can do with magic, mundanes can do with tech. That is why in older editions, martials had tons of magic gear.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Magic is superior. It's fantasy's version of technology. In settings like Shadowrun, magic and tech are on par. Most of things mages can do with magic, mundanes can do with tech. That is why in older editions, martials had tons of magic gear.

The hierarchy between magic/technology and mundane ability is not and does not need to be rigidly defined.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

In your previous example, you said this:
the chasm is 15 ft wide. My jump distance is only 9ft. Can I try it anyway?
Yes. But it is a hard check

Is that a hard check because you increased the distance by 5 ft [making them short by a foot, but that was reasonable fudging]? Increased it by 10 ft [putting them over the limit]? Or doubled the jump distance [putting them over the limit]?

As a DM, not just as a player, this MATTERS. Because when I look at a player with a jump distance of 18 ft, I need to know whether or not the chasm is reasonable to jump if it is 22 ft across, 28 ft across, or 38 ft across. Let's say I'm a human champion fighter, and the DM has stated that it is 40 ft gap between the walls and the castle. My jump distance is normally 22 ft, should I even consider that I can jump that distance? If it is a DC 20 check, and I have a +7 with advantage.... that isn't a bad deal, maybe throw a bit of bard inspiration on it. If a DC 20 check can only extend me to 27 ft, this is impossible and I need another solution..

Sure, if the DM is making a chasm, they can decide how hard it is to cross, but unless they have stated their rules the player is probably going to see they can't make the jump with their known numbers, and dismiss the attempt out of hand.



I don't disagree with your point broadly, but there is an issue. Well, a few issues.

Swimming is never a check, unless you are dealing with rapids or rough seas. I know some people disagree with me, but that is what the book says. So, it is never a roll to swim in a stream or a river... so is swimming through white water rapids a DC 10? That's when the rolling starts, so that would make sense right?

And jumping onto a small table would be the same... except, wait, a person with a +1 strength who can run up can jump onto a 4 ft surface without a check. So, for them, there should be no DC. And are we talking landing on their feet, or grabbing with their hands and pulling up?

This is why, actually, I think we would be better serve with examples and rules in each section. A DC 10 jump might just be "add your strength mod to the distance again, minimum of +1" which makes sense for how the jumping rules are presented, while a DC 10 swim is going to be more about "swimming through strong currents or thick liquids" which makes sense for how those rules are already structured.

I agree, don't want a million tables, but since the rules for these things already work differently, the examples need to be different to make sense.


I disagree. Because the felt difficulty is so malleable that it becomes impossible to guess. And the players need to have some conception of how difficult something might be, to consider it.

I've altered the strength lifting rules so that player's feel as strong as I think they should, but if I don't tell the player "your goliath barbarian is strong enough to pick up and throw a Harley" then they aren't going to even consider trying to rip the steel bars from the stone of their prison cell, because they feel that would be too hard for them. They need to have reference points, even vague ones, and so the DM. After all, I imagine you are thinking that should be a DC 20 or 25 check to accomplish, since breaking manacle chains is a DC 20 strength check, but for me, I would actually lower that manacle check, and for a strong enough character, they can just do that task, because I have the basis of how strong they are to reference, and if you can throw a small car, I don't think you are going to reasonably struggle to snap unenchanted chains with a few minutes of effort.

Your whole post shows what I find problematic. You take all those numbers as hard rules. I answer to 1 point and leave it at that:
The 15ft wide chasm isn't actually 15ft. It is 15ft here. 12ft over there and 16ft on the other side. The world is not built in straight lines neatly 5ft apart.
So my check example (which btw I totally pulled out of my.... hat, like my exaple DCs) was just a compilation of finding the right space to jump and put in extra efforts and taking some risks.

I totally reject absoluteness of some tasks. Everything is a dialogue between DM and Players and the roll with the DC is just the last decider. And it should never boil down to: "too sad, you jump 1ft short because of strange rule x and you drop to your death".
I rather use the failure with a cost if they fail the DC by 5 or less and make them either hurt themself a bit or let them jump short but allow them to grasp the edge of the chasm.
There is no exact calculation required.

Of course you coul calculate how far they jump, calculate the reach of the arms... but that is no fun. And I say that as a maths teacher.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Magic is superior.

Only because people wont' let other things be interesting or powerful without labeling it magic as per the premise of this thread.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Well, we have general rules about what is considered easy, medium and hard dc. So it's up to Dm to decide how difficult it would be for character to do what player wants to do. Its in line with "rulings not rules" design. We do have rules. You roll d20 and add proficiency plus stat mod (or just stat mod) and maybe have advantage/disadvantage based on circumstances. Skill checks are more art than science. You feel what would be apropriate in given situation. And baseline is our knowledge and experience in how world works. FE we know that swiming in full plate is extremly hard. So if pc wants to swim over calm little river, they would have to roll.

Magic explicitly bends or brakes reality. Thats why there are detailed description of spells. They have more or less precise wording on scope of reality bending it can do.

And you have immediately demonstrated the problem, because the bolded is FALSE.

Rules from the PHB, pg 182: Each foot of movement costs 1 extra foot (2 extra feet in difficult terrain) when you're climbing, swimming, or crawling. You ignore this extra cost if you have a climbing speed and use it to climb, or a swimming speed and use it to swim. At the DM's option, climbing a slippery vertical surface or one with few handholds requires a successful Strength (Athletics) check. Similarly, gaining any distance in rough water might require a successful Strength (Athletics) check.

These are the entirety of the rules for swimming. There are other rules for holding your breath, or making attacks underwater, but nothing else is stated for swimming rules. So, if my fighter in full plate wants to swim over a calm little river... there is no roll, they just deal with difficult terrain.

Yes, you can argue until you are blue in the face that it would be hard, nay a death sentence, for a real life human being to attempt that. It doesn't matter. The rules state there is no roll for this. The DM can optionally decide there might be a roll for rough water, but otherwise you are wrong.

So... if what you consider hard isn't even a challenge for the PC... what is supposed to be hard for them?

 

[Chaosmancer]

Your whole post shows what I find problematic. You take all those numbers as hard rules. I answer to 1 point and leave it at that:
The 15ft wide chasm isn't actually 15ft. It is 15ft here. 12ft over there and 16ft on the other side. The world is not built in straight lines neatly 5ft apart.
So my check example (which btw I totally pulled out of my.... hat, like my exaple DCs) was just a compilation of finding the right space to jump and put in extra efforts and taking some risks.

I totally reject absoluteness of some tasks. Everything is a dialogue between DM and Players and the roll with the DC is just the last decider. And it should never boil down to: "too sad, you jump 1ft short because of strange rule x and you drop to your death".
I rather use the failure with a cost if they fail the DC by 5 or less and make them either hurt themself a bit or let them jump short but allow them to grasp the edge of the chasm.
There is no exact calculation required.

Of course you coul calculate how far they jump, calculate the reach of the arms... but that is no fun. And I say that as a maths teacher.

But you aren't getting my point. I also don't necessarily care about the exact footage of the jump.

Is a 40 foot jump possible for the character to make? That is a legit question that depends on what the rules are. If your rules say that a check can double my distance, it is possible, but hard. If your rules say you are merely adding 5 to 10 ft to the distance, then it is impossible.

Here, I'll give another example.

Can a player catch a galloping horse and tackle the rider from the horse? Now, if we look at the rules as written... no, it is impossible for most players (barring high level monks). The horse dashes to make it 120 ft per round, and the player is going to be moving half that speed. Will the player ask to roll an athletics check to catch up with the horse?

Not can they ask. Not what are the rules that you would use... will they even ask? They know how far the horse went, especially if they end up asking. They know their own speed. They can do simple math.

Now, at my table, if they remember my rules (which they may not) then the rogue might go "Huh, I can move 90 ft if I double dash. I know I can go faster if I roll athletics... this might work" and then they will ask if they have a chance to do it. But if they don't think the rules will allow them to move faster with an athletics roll, even if you as the DM would allow it IF THEY ASKED, they are not going to ask. So you can't tell them it is possible.


This is the point I'm trying to get across. The lack of solid rules makes it harder for me as the DM, because I don't know if the chasm is too large or not if I don't know my player's capabilities. And it is worse for the players, because if they don't know what the rules are, they are going to picture what THEY think is reasonable, and while you are expecting they might find a narrow part of the chasm and be able to make it with a high roll... they are thinking "I doubt my noodly character can jump 5ft, there is no way I could ever make that jump" and so they will cut off all consideration of that solution.

We don't need hard numbers for everything, but we need benchmark numbers, so everyone is on the same page of what a character is capable of.