D&D 5E Hang Time - What if you jump farther than your speed?

[Hriston]

Are you actually arguing for a playstyle where players can only declare intent in 6 second increments? How do they ritually cast? How do they rest?

Dear god, how do they poop?!

We’re talking about combat.

And no, I’m not arguing for my play style. I’m merely representing it.

 

[Pauper]

Are you actually arguing for a playstyle where players can only declare intent in 6 second increments? How do they ritually cast? How do they rest?

Dear god, how do they poop?!

Pooping is a free action, and can be done even when it isn't a character's turn.

Sadly, most DMs I know don't give their heavily armored PCs enough warning to fully get out of their armor beforehand.

--
Pauper

 

[TwoSix]

Pooping is a free action, and can be done even when it isn't a character's turn.

Ahh, to be young.

 

[Oofta]

No, you don’t. The desired fiction implicit in the player’s action declaration is that the character is aiming for a point only part-way across the chasm. The stated intention is for forward momentum to end there. Why would I deny the player the result of their stated action declaration?

This is where we just agree to disagree. The stated intent is to leap with enough forward and upward momentum to clear the chasm. Your DM ruling is that you don't want to deal with that. So all forward momentum stops at the end of the turn, basic Newtonian physics is ignored, and the PC plummets to their possible death.

 

[Oofta]

Are you actually arguing for a playstyle where players can only declare intent in 6 second increments? How do they ritually cast? How do they rest?

Dear god, how do they poop?!

Ex-lax and projectile pooping?

 

[Oofta]

As an observation likely covered well before now.

Its worth noting that in PHB you can try to make longer jumps. There is no "cut off hover in space OMG what now" paradox but instead an ability check to make longer jumps. See using an ability.

So perhaps it should be resolved more directly as any other ability check with approach, goal, DC then check.

So your jump across chasm could become DC 25 to leap all the way across, DCwp to leap across and catch the side, DC 15 to leap then land on a lower ledge on the other side taking some falling dmg, etc. If the situation is impossible, then thats the result but as many are want to throw in not impossible examples here... Seems worth noting.

I thibk like most cases moving to use the base resolution mechanics whoch bring all those interpretive situational factors in as DC and focus on the PC abilities can serve the play better than just hard line fiat of float for a turn or cannot try etc.

Especially when you actually have a skill option spelled out related to this - even if not exact.

There are a lot of variables. If, for example the chasm is 25 feet and you have a 20 strength regardless of whether you have the movement to complete the jump.

I don't allow people to move further than their action economy allows in a single turn barring magic/special circumstances. Leaping further than normally allowed is certainly possible but a separate issue.

Oh and they don't "float" for a turn. From the PCs perspective their turns are happening one right after another, there's no time gap. We just can't resolve simultaneous in a pen-and-paper game. A single round takes the same amount of time if there's 1 creature acting or 50.

 

[Sadras]

This is not something I have ever thought about before, but I would certainly allow a midway jump between turns at my table. It makes logical sense. On the face of it, it appears it would provide for some interesting roleplaying scenarios.

 

[5ekyu]

There are a lot of variables. If, for example the chasm is 25 feet and you have a 20 strength regardless of whether you have the movement to complete the jump.

I don't allow people to move further than their action economy allows in a single turn barring magic/special circumstances. Leaping further than normally allowed is certainly possible but a separate issue.

Oh and they don't "float" for a turn. From the PCs perspective their turns are happening one right after another, there's no time gap. We just can't resolve simultaneous in a pen-and-paper game. A single round takes the same amount of time if there's 1 creature acting or 50.

"Float for a turn" is not limited to "pc perspective".

But hey, kets look at the case of ending turn in mid air, allowing that to continue into next turn, and strict not allowing more movement than action economy.

During your turn in air... You get hit by any number of effects that mean you dont get movement nect turn.

Lets say psychic dmg renders you unconscious.

It doesnt move you, no physical impact...

Start of your next turn do you get free movement to compkete the jump even though you are uncobscious and unable yo move? Or do you plummet straight down?

Could be sleep spell or any number of other cases.

To me, it seems that one who is very concerned about the "pc perspective" rules framework might find it easier to minimize the whacky results by using the athletics jump rules to resolve the action.

It could even be a case of:
Make the check against dc x and get across with full move next turn.
Make it against dc y and make it across but lose some movement from bext turn.
Make it against dc z and make it across but (insert situationally appropriate effects)
Fail and dont make it across.

But to be clear as to where this can go, PHB defines failure on a check as "makes no progress towards the objective or makes progress with setback determined by the GM."

To me, it just seems a lot cleaner to use the options directly spelled out in the PHB to handle the edge case of "leaping over larger gap than current movement allows but which is within my normal leap distance" with skill checks and setbacks than to try and house rule in that hang-time that is not hang-time and all the exceptions it creates.

I think for many GMs, the check/resolve/setback would play out more quickly, fluidly and consustently to the base mechanics in a wider set of games than pseudo-hang time.


But, people love their house rules so, far be it from me to seek to change a more my rule sort of thing.

 

[5ekyu]

As for "a lot of variables" and the w5' gap but you only have 20' jump... Absolutely, there are lots of variables in many challenging cases. Thats why we have the whole GM sets DC and checks and all that...

The 25' but only 20' seems to be one example of a case precisely dead spot on to the skill check for "unusually long jumps" mentioned in the PHB.

 

[Oofta]

"Float for a turn" is not limited to "pc perspective".

But hey, kets look at the case of ending turn in mid air, allowing that to continue into next turn, and strict not allowing more movement than action economy.

During your turn in air... You get hit by any number of effects that mean you dont get movement nect turn.

Lets say psychic dmg renders you unconscious.

It doesnt move you, no physical impact...

Start of your next turn do you get free movement to compkete the jump even though you are uncobscious and unable yo move? Or do you plummet straight down?

Could be sleep spell or any number of other cases.

To me, it seems that one who is very concerned about the "pc perspective" rules framework might find it easier to minimize the whacky results by using the athletics jump rules to resolve the action.

It could even be a case of:
Make the check against dc x and get across with full move next turn.
Make it against dc y and make it across but lose some movement from bext turn.
Make it against dc z and make it across but (insert situationally appropriate effects)
Fail and dont make it across.

But to be clear as to where this can go, PHB defines failure on a check as "makes no progress towards the objective or makes progress with setback determined by the GM."

To me, it just seems a lot cleaner to use the options directly spelled out in the PHB to handle the edge case of "leaping over larger gap than current movement allows but which is within my normal leap distance" with skill checks and setbacks than to try and house rule in that hang-time that is not hang-time and all the exceptions it creates.

I think for many GMs, the check/resolve/setback would play out more quickly, fluidly and consustently to the base mechanics in a wider set of games than pseudo-hang time.


But, people love their house rules so, far be it from me to seek to change a more my rule sort of thing.

Yep, getting hit or affected by a spell while jumping could suck. Whether that happens because another creature's turn happens or because a readied action is triggered doesn't really matter.

Maybe there was an invisible giant with a readied action to throw a boulder at anyone that attempts the jump. Or anyone that crosses a certain point hits a ward that knocks them unconscious. Or there's a wall of force that they splat against. These are all edge cases ... but so is the whole scenario of ending a turn mid-air.

I get that people don't want to deal with it, and that's fine. But to say things like hitting someone mid-air could never happen during a PC's turn? Not true.