Use of Skills Question

[windman68]

Well done, that's the way it should be ruled, it takes physical strength to move something - not stunts.
I agree with "fba", it sounds like the Drow was trying to get by on succeeding with the best skill he could use for the situation. Props for sticking to your guns. Was the shield handled by the Paly or was it propped against something, in which case the Paly also should have made an Acrobatics check for balance against athletics - momentum towards his shield - if he had failed,the action would've failed as well... wouldn't it?

 

[Kordeth]

Was the shield handled by the Paly or was it propped against something, in which case the Paly also should have made an Acrobatics check for balance against athletics - momentum towards his shield - if he had failed,the action would've failed as well... wouldn't it?

IMO, that's excessive. "Bounce off the paladin's shield" is purely flavor text in this instance--the meat of the action as I understand it is "tumble through enemy's spaces* to get to the statue, push the statue over." The paladin isn't actually contributing anything to that maneuver, so he shouldn't have to roll anything. 4E is supposed to encourage stunts like this, not bury them beneath a plethora of required skill checks for every minute aspect of the stunt. I'd allow the paladin an immediate reaction to try Aid Another on the Athletics check to reflect giving the rogue a momentum boost (the old "fastball special"), with the caveat that a failed attempt would incur a -2 penalty instead of a +2 bonus, maybe. But requiring a third skill check for a one-time stunt? Too much.

* I'm assuming it was enemies he was trying to vault over, since you can freely pass through allies' squares. If he was just moving through allies' spaces, even the Acrobatics check would be unnecessary.

 

[windman68]

IMO, that's excessive. "Bounce off the paladin's shield" is purely flavor text in this instance--the meat of the action as I understand it is "tumble through enemy's spaces* to get to the statue, push the statue over." The paladin isn't actually contributing anything to that maneuver, so he shouldn't have to roll anything. 4E is supposed to encourage stunts like this, not bury them beneath a plethora of required skill checks for every minute aspect of the stunt. I'd allow the paladin an immediate reaction to try Aid Another on the Athletics check to reflect giving the rogue a momentum boost (the old "fastball special"), with the caveat that a failed attempt would incur a -2 penalty instead of a +2 bonus, maybe. But requiring a third skill check for a one-time stunt? Too much.

* I'm assuming it was enemies he was trying to vault over, since you can freely pass through allies' squares. If he was just moving through allies' spaces, even the Acrobatics check would be unnecessary.

Actually the Paly is contributing quite a bit to the Rangers success or failure by assisting in holding his shield as a platform for the Ranger, not tumbling through his space, 2 characters are involved with one action, one making the move and the other assisting, so in fact - it requires an additional check by the Paly to keep from falling backwards from the force or to assist in giving a boost. Hell, some skills require more than that to succeed. Skill checks are put in the game for a reason, to make it challenging, but some people overlook them and shun them on for one reason or another, and if that works for them , more power to them, but as a DM, that's part of the job, to keep it challenging, otherwise players get that "My DM will let me do it" attitude, players need to keep in mind that there could be consequences behind every action, it keeps them on their toes, keeps them thinking. I agree however in which not everything has to be checked, but in instance like this, I would require it by both players. Besides, isn't kinda fun to be able to use your dice for other things rather than just att & dmg rolls?

 

[Aran Thule]

* I'm assuming it was enemies he was trying to vault over, since you can freely pass through allies' squares. If he was just moving through allies' spaces, even the Acrobatics check would be unnecessary.

Bah I play the ranger, the drow is a rogue, if i remember correctly the acrobatics were not so much to avoid enemies but to get up to the statue which was on a higher level.
I think the description was: Bounce off Paladin's shield, grab chandelier and then swing onto the statues head knocking it onto the foe.

My opinion is that you ran it right and in the same way that you ran previous stunts.
For example when my Halfling Ranger tried to acrobatically kick a very large pot of boiling soup and you deemed it was a str roll.

 

[timbannock]

It sounds like you made a very reasonable set of requirements for what the character described they wanted to do.

Acrobatics for highly cinematic movement, giving them an advantage over normal movement.

Athletics to topple a giant statue, with an extra +2 bonus from the stylish manoeuvre.

Actually you were probably being a little kind for the sake of doing something cool, the statue would have to be pretty unstable to be able to topple so easily. But your player obviously didn't stop to consider this. You could maybe have allowed the character whose shield he was springing from to ready an action to assist the athletics roll (another +2) to represent him pushing him off adding to his momentum.

I agree with everything in this post, and especially like the note about assist. Wish I'd thought of that ;-)

 

[LostSoul]

I think you did a fine job.

This probably would have been my ruling:

Move: Acrobatics to get through occupied spaces. He still draws OAs like normal.
Standard: Str vs. Ref. Hit: x damage, prone and immobilized (save ends). Effect: the ground becomes difficult terrain.

I don't care if he can push over the statue or not. Either he can and he does, or he can't and he doesn't. We don't really need to roll to resolve that.

What I do care about is the damage done to the NPC, so I'd roll to resolve that.

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

Actually you were probably being a little kind for the sake of doing something cool, the statue would have to be pretty unstable to be able to topple so easily.

being kind for the sake of doing something cool is exactly where I want to be as a DM!

 

[cstyln]

I think actually you were being a bit to kind to him. Pulling off a massive manuever as such requires alot of multiple skills. I would have made him make an athletics chec, followed by acrobatics check, followed by a str check, followed by a final attack vs. ac check. add +2 to the move were he was using momentum to shoving the statue.

 

[Camelot]

I solved my confusion about acrobatics/athletics overlap by saying that athletics lets you jump high and far, while acrobatics lets you move in a way that requires dexterity.

With this, if a player wants to jump over an enemy, they need to make an athletics check to avoid landing on the enemy and an acrobatics check to avoid getting hit by an opportunity attack.

In your case, I think you ruled fine. I would have been even stricter and said it was athletics to jump and push, plus acrobatics to avoid getting attacked along the way by enemies. The +2 from the paladin's shield is perfect however. It was a very good ruling!

 

[Flipguarder]

Matthew you did some darn fine dming imo.