Missing Rules

[Charlaquin]

It doesn't have to have meaning by itself. It just has to have meaning. That's the ONLY requirement with regard to meaning.

My dude, the thing I said that you've been arguing with this whole time was "failing to achieve your goal does not have meaning per se (which means by itself)." If you didn't disagree with that, why have you been arguing against it?

 

[Charlaquin]

So, its you deciding for my character that every other time i am always going full out? Wasn't part of this not assuming for the players what and how they were doing things?

I'm giving your character the benefit of the doubt that they do their best when it matters. Would you prefer to jump fewer than your Strength in feet across this gap?

You do know that "not holding back" or "going all out" every move is pretty much one of the first thing coaches try to teach out of athletes in many sports except those that involve a mostly complete lack of precision or control? Everything is not a sprint. Sometimes control matters.

Especially in almost anything around combat.

Now you're just being pedantic. I assume competence on the part of the characters. That includes knowing when to conserve energy and when to spend it. That's part of doing the best you can.

 

[5ekyu]

If the distance is so short that you don't need to roll, I don't think it can possibly qualify as dangerous: you literally can't fail.

If the distance is great enough that failure is a possibility, I absolutely agree that they'll use maximum effort.

Absolutely... you use greatest effort when needed and enough to get it done under the conditions when not. The jump distance under movement if free action as part of movement no fail unless terrain at landing jump distance - or in other words - safe, controlled and precise. Even with my *limited* athletics experience, i know that means there is more power than that which gives you perfect control, safety and precision. just watch tennis and the difference in speeds between first serve and second serve (where the risk of out of bounds is nil for the first and tons for the second) at most levels but really at even the tops and see how much an assumption of "always all out full strength" makes sense for athletics.

but hey, makes sense for some i suppose.

Foer me, i tell my players the jump from chap 8 is the safe, no risk (barring situational) and the ability checks is the farther and at risk and they already know that with risks comes the possibility of failure and setbacks. Then they decide which way to go. They dont need me deciding that for them.

 

[Xetheral]

I didn't say characters try to jump as far as possible whenever they jump. I said characters put in their best effort at all times. Your best effort to jump 5 feet looks pretty different than your best effort to jump 50.

This makes zero sense to me. How is "best effort" when it comes to jumping distance not correlated with how far you try to jump?

Coach: "Ok, I want you to put in your best effort on this jump!"

Athlete: (Jumps five feet despite being capable of farther distances)

Coach: "That wasn't your best effort!"

Athlete: "Sure it was!"

Because of maximum effort. Again, the rule says that your strength determines how far you can go, and then proceeds to tell you how far you can go in the jump rules.

If they don't use maximum effort, they aren't going to go strength distance. It's only auto succeed because of the maximum effort.

In my mind, if something requires maximum effort, it can't possibly be an auto-success. Consider: because the character is capable of attempting higher-difficulty tasks (with a chance of failure) the character must, by definition, be capable of putting in more effort than required to auto-succeed at lower-difficulty tasks.

 

[5ekyu]

I'm giving your character the benefit of the doubt that they do their best when it matters. Would you prefer that I assume your character half-asses it unless you say otherwise?

I prefer that you do not assume anything about my character's choices between effort and precision, safety and risk. i think that should be my choice as the decider for that character as to what they want to try and do.

If i want an all-out jump with risk of failure and chance of longer distance *by the rules* then i expect you to allow me to choose that. if you decide thats not possible unless i invent flittering pogo sticks or some other "buzz words" i have to use, i hope you tell me that too.

But since i know at least enough to know that "amount you can safely do accurately without fail on the run" is *not at all* the same as "the most you can do all out with risk" when it comes to most of these athletics moves *and8 when the rulebook puts the rule there in play that reflects that... unless you have house ruled it overtly - i do not expect you to choose for me its not there as an option.

be upfront about your house rules or even the silly DC40 stealth house rules.

Maybe too much to ask for some.

Now you're just being pedantic. I assume competence on the part of the characters. That includes knowing when to conserve energy and when to spend it. That's part of doing the best you can.

So is knowing when risk and such is necessary and when its not based on the circumstances before you.

most of the time, the safe jump on the fly with no risk and no inaccuracy is the best bet - in my experience that is.
most of the time,working mage hand rope across or some other guarantee approach is the best bet.,
but sometimes you may just have to take the leap and take the risk unless your GM sees no difference between "full on all out jump for distance with chance of failure or setback" and "safe, on the fly, never inaccurate always land on my feet on the run with no probs unless we hit terrain." quick jumps.

But hey, your players tolerance is the deciding factor at any table.

 

[5ekyu]

We seem to have a fundamental disagreement that wont be resolved by further examples and arguments.

 

[Maxperson]

This makes zero sense to me. How is "best effort" when it comes to jumping distance not correlated with how far you try to jump?

Coach: "Ok, I want you to put in your best effort on this jump!"

Athlete: (Jumps five feet despite being capable of farther distances)

Coach: "That wasn't your best effort!"

Athlete: "Sure it was!"

Have the coach let them know that there's a hidden pit trap and see if a single one doesn't try as hard as he freaking can. It's a False Equivalence to equate that example to D&D jumps that have consequences.

In my mind, if something requires maximum effort, it can't possibly be an auto-success. Consider: because the character is capable of attempting higher-difficulty tasks (with a chance of failure) the character must, by definition, be capable of putting in more effort than required to auto-succeed at lower-difficulty tasks.

It can in a game where it's needed for other reasons. The reality is, you aren't ever going to be able to jump the exact same distance every single time, but the game simplifies it for reasons. I gave what I think are those reasons.

 

[Charlaquin]

I prefer that you do not assume anything about my character's choices between effort and precision, safety and risk.i think that should be my choice as the decider for that character as to what they want to try and do.

If i want an all-out jump with risk of failure and chance of longer distance *by the rules* then i expect you to allow me to choose that.

Great. Then tell me how far you’re trying to jump, and I’ll tell you if that’s possible by the rules.

if you decide thats not possible unless i invent flittering pogo sticks or some other "buzz words" i have to use, i hope you tell me that too.

It has nothing to do with buzz words. By the rules, your strength determines how far you can jump. By the rules, one possible result of a successful Strength (Athletics) check is jumping an unusually long distance. By the rules, the player describes what their character does, the DM determines the results, possibly asking for an ability check, and narrates the results. So tell me how far you want to get and how, and I’ll determine the results, asking for an ability check if I determine one is necessary, and narrate the results.

But since i know at least enough to know that "amount you can safely do accurately without fail on the run" is *not at all* the same as "the most you can do all out with risk" when it comes to most of these athletics moves
*and8 when the rulebook puts the rule there in play that reflects that... unless you have house ruled it overtly - i do not expect you to choose for me its not there as an option.

It is not, by the rules, the player’s role to decide if an ability check is necessary to determine the results of an action, so don’t act like it is and then try to tell me I’m using house rules.

be upfront about your house rules or even the silly DC40 stealth house rules.

I have no idea what DC40 stealth house rule you’re talking about. Perhaps you are confusing me with someone else?

So is knowing when risk and such is necessary and when its not based on the circumstances before you.

Mhmm, and I take that into account too, and I assume your character is competent enough to know when to take those risks, and to succeed when it matters.

 

[5ekyu]

Great. Then tell me how far you’re trying to jump, and I’ll tell you if that’s possible by the rules.


It has nothing to do with buzz words. By the rules, your strength determines how far you can jump. By the rules, one possible result of a successful Strength (Athletics) check is jumping an unusually long distance. By the rules, the player describes what their character does, the DM determines the results, possibly asking for an ability check, and narrates the results. So tell me how far you want to get and how, and I’ll determine the results, asking for an ability check if I determine one is necessary, and narrate the results.


It is not, by the rules, the player’s role to decide if an ability check is necessary to determine the results of an action, so don’t act like it is and then try to tell me I’m using house rules.


I have no idea what DC40 stealth house rule you’re talking about. Perhaps you are confusing me with someone else?


Mhmm, and I take that into account too, and I assume your character is competent enough to know when to take those risks, and to succeed when it matters.


You know, these passive aggressive jabs make you very unpleasant to talk to.

I reference player choice at table for how much they will accept being important to games, you call me specifically unpleasant to talk to.

Got it.

 

[KenNYC]

Can't you just as DM make a ruling? If I was DMing two characters of equal stats and one said "ok, I am dropping all my gear and taking a big leap, the fact he thought enough to take his gear off should count for something. If it is 10 feet and we are talking characters with STR and DEX of say 16ish or better, I would just say "you get across just barely, but what about your gear you left behind?"

If it was some player and the character had platemail and 10,000 GP and he wants to take a huge leap, well, no natural 20 in the world is going to make me as DM think that that A) makes sense, or B) could possibly work. If the players at the table make sense then I see no reason to punish the characters by subjecting them to needless rolls of dice that can frustrate the best plans with natural 1s. Conversely, I don't care if you roll perpetual 20s, if you play in a way that makes no sense I am not rewarding your character for dumb luck.