D&D 5E 30 speed for all! Halflings, Gnomes, Dwarves were feeling left behind?

[Ahnehnois]

Your idea makes sense, but I prefer D&D Next's methodology of resolving everything with some sort of an ability check. The Dex vs. Dex, or Con vs. Con contest has an elegance and degree of randomness to it that I think better captures the essence of a pursuit or foot race. Flatly telling a character he has no chance of catching someone because his speed is 5' slower seems a bit undramatic and 'fun-terminating'.

I get that. However, I think if speed is going to have a number at all, there ought to be some meaning to that number. There's a case to be made for abandoning the speed rating (and frankly, grid-based positioning) altogether, in which case, then the ability checks can and should prevail. However, I don't think it makes any sense to go to the trouble of assigning a speed rating if that speed means nothing because everyone has the same speed.

 

[Wulfgar76]

I get that. However, I think if speed is going to have a number at all, there ought to be some meaning to that number. There's a case to be made for abandoning the speed rating (and frankly, grid-based positioning) altogether, in which case, then the ability checks can and should prevail. However, I don't think it makes any sense to go to the trouble of assigning a speed rating if that speed means nothing because everyone has the same speed.

I tend to agree. So a related question: how do you make the speed penalty of Heavy Armor mean anything in a gridless game?

 

[Ahnehnois]

I tend to agree. So a related question: how do you make the speed penalty of Heavy Armor mean anything in a gridless game?

Good question. How does 13th Age do it?

If it's important to know who covers ground faster, the GM determines how to make the 'speed check' by using either common sense or stats and skills.

Maybe it's just a modifier to the check? I can't even tell.

The reality is that in a typical game, movement speed rarely comes into play (thus, the "If" it's important to know who covers ground faster). If you want to emphasize tactical movement, it makes sense to give that part of the game a little more depth than just giving everyone the same speed. If you don't, it doesn't make sense to go to the trouble of measuring speed and position in feet at all.

 

[dmgorgon]

I haven't read the thread yet, but before I even form an opinion on this subject lets actually examine the facts.

Here is what I found from our friend Google.

The average walking speed is 4.95 feet/s.
A round is 6 seconds.
Therefore: the average human can walk 29.7 feet per round.

Now, in combat you might alternate between a jog and very slowly movement. So it should average out to about the same speed as the average walk. I think that's reasonable and it seems that a speed of 30 feet is justified, but lets keep in mind that it's just an average.

One big question is if smaller characters would run more or not during combat. I think they might be forced to move a bit quicker in combat. In fact, being smaller might even afford them more of an opportunity to do so.

Other important considerations are height, weight, age, terrain, surface, load, culture, effort, and fitness etc. Of course, since D&D isn't ultra detailed in this regard moving 30 feet in combat isn't a big deal. I mean, if old Fat Albert gets 30 feet per round then so should Frodo. So until D&D becomes less abstract in this regard it's a pointless argument.

With that said, we should be concerned with averages. In that case, movement rate for running (chase situations) and overland movement should change. At some point being smaller will have a disadvantage - on average.

 

[Morrus]

I'm not the one posting in threads discussing rules about games I do not play and have no interest in playing.

Whooooooosh, that's you, not having a clue, about anything.

Whoosh, that's you taking a couple of days off. Maybe you can spend it learning some manners.

 

[Cadence]

Stupid threads giving me an excuse to go googling for articles when I have work to do!
http://www.hindawi.com/journals/janthro/2012/340493/

On the other hand I never would have learned about the social aspects of movement rates without it...
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0076576

 

[Mistwell]

As a matter of verisimilitude, this discussion is stupid. My dog has 10% of my size and I simply cannot cover the same distance as him in the same amount of time. As Yoda would say, size matters not. Agility? Sure. Physiology? Probably. We're talking about fantasy races here, they're as quick as the designers want to describe them to be, and there's already a precedent for "as fast as humans" small races in OD&D. Also, if anything else fails, this is the kind of thing where applying a house rule is so easy that their change has no power at all to hurt your game. Next is the "play the way you want" edition, just do that.

Cheers!

Earl Boykins (a professional basketball player) runs faster than anyone in this thread, and can do it for an hour straight and while weaving through traffic.

So did Spud Webb, who won the NBA slam dunk contest.

So did Tyrone "Muggsy" Bogues (who played alongside a guy who was 28 inches taller than him).

Any yet you know what, all of them are short guys. Not just "short for the NBA", but actually short. I think Muggsy is 5'3"?

The tallest guy doesn't often win the short track race nor the marathon, either.

I get that "all things being equal, shorter should be slower," but we're not talking about an "all things being equal" situation here. We're talking about a base speed that is supposed to cover equally a 16 year old male athlete in top form, and an 85 year old woman with arthritis and breathing problems. We're talking about different SPECIES of humanoids which could have different physiologists from humans. And we're talking about situations of combat where adrenaline is pumping and obstacles vary wildly from encounter to encounter. And we're talking about bursts of speed, 30 seconds to a minute of time for combat, and not marathon overland speeds (which I would agree should vary between the races). But SOME halfliings should be able to move five times as fast as SOME humans for instance, particularly in a burst speed of 30 seconds.

So all things are not equal, and the range of species and ages and levels of fitness and health and events occurring vary so wildly that any discussion of "verisimilitude" really rings false to me.

Like I said, I vaguely would prefer a slower speed for the smaller races, but only in a mild way, and mostly because of recent tradition. But, it's not because it messes with the appearance of being true and real - it's perfectly believable to me that an average halfling adventurer moves as fast as the average half-orc adventurer during 30 seconds of combat, because of the wild swinging variables involved in movement speeds I mentioned above.

 

[DMZ2112]

I think anyone would be hard pressed to /invent/ a D&D5 rules "controversy" that I cared less about. Between this and DOAM I'm going out of my mind with boredom lately.

*claps loudly* EN World! Commence being entertaining again -- this I command!

 

[Derren]

Any yet you know what, all of them are short guys. Not just "short for the NBA", but actually short. I think Muggsy is 5'3"?

But we are also not talking about 5'3'' "short", we are talking about 3'.

 

[Mistwell]

But we are also not talking about 5'3'' "short", we are talking about 3'.

My point was that in the real world drastic variations in height don't necessarily translate into variations in speed. Muggsy was 28" shorter than his teammate, Manute Bol, but Muggsy was faster than Manute. 28 inches is coincidentally the difference in inches between your 3' example and the 5'3" example.

The short guy on the right would race down the court far faster than the tall guy on the left. However, the tall guy on the left could block shots and dunk better than the short guy on the right. Their difference in height is roughly the same as the difference in height between a normal halfling adventurer and a normal human adventurer.