Climb, Jump, Swim...

kaomera

Explorer
So I picked up the new Star Wars Saga edition (d20) last week... I'm not finished reading through the whole thing, but it works on a somewhat slimmed-down d20 system. One of the specific things that was done was to combine similar skills so that there are now only 19 of them, even with new stuff like Endurance, Initiative, and Use The Force...

One thing that struck me right away was that the skills Climb, Jump, and Swim where all still there, as separate entries. This seemed a bit odd to me, and I wondered why they where not combined into an Athletics skill or the like. I don't seem to see these skills actually used all that often when I run or play D&D. It isn't exactly rare, and my experiences may be well apart from the norm, but it seems to me that players will usually avoid having to make such a skill check it's at all possible (assuming that the check would not be an automatic success or nearly so). (And I believe that the aversion to Swim checks, which are much less likely to have a really bad result from a single check, may have more to what kinds of creepies might be lurking under the water's surface than anything else.) As a matter of fact, I'm fairly well convinced that these skills aren't really all that much fun in play. I mean, it's fine when you succeed, and it can certainly make for a bit of tension, but if you fail such a check (can't climb the wall {or even fall} / don't manage to get all the way across the chasm / go under and start to drown), that's not all that cool, right?

Possibly it would just take more good opportunities to use such skills in a heroic manner, but it seems like if there is A) a meaningful reason to need to make such a check, and B) the check offers a decent challenge, then there's the real possibility of the PCs taking a significant setback on a single roll of the die. I know that's sort of part of playing D&D, and it doesn't need to be "save-or-die", but "save-or-suck" is nearly as bad and it's something I try to minimize.

Another aspect is that, as I mentioned, players seem to avoid such checks. Pretty much every action-hero-ish PC is going to have a decent amount of their skill points devoted to such skills, since they want to be able to do action-hero-ish stuff, but at the same time they will typically look for another way around as well as invest in equipment and/or powers that allow them to avoid actually having to roll. This is especially true of Fighters and the like. Pretty much any non-Rogue physically-oriented character (as opposed mainly to spellcasters) is likely to end up sinking (what is, IMHO) an overly large portion of their rather meager skill points to these skills, often for little return.

So I was just kind of wondering what was up with that... I mean, you don't have to invest in such skills, but is seems like an obvious move for a lot of characters. But at the same time, while you want your character to be able to "do his own stunts" if you will, it's really only cool when the character just barely makes it up the side of the cliff by the skin of his teeth, not so much when he falls to his death...

Anyone have any thoughts on how to resolve this issue? Specifically, is there some good way to ensure that a botched Climb or Jump check isn't going to make the game less fun?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Well, in SWSE it's less bad because a Strength-based character will at least half their level plus their Strength modifier to add, which should give them a measure of competency.

In normal D&D, spells usually fill in the skills gap, especially later on.

Regardless, I don't really see a serious problem combined Climb, Jump, and Swim into Athletics, especially if you're playing a heroic (as opposed to gritty or simulationist) game.

In my games, it's not uncommon for me to lump Climb, Jump, and Swim into Athletics, just like I often combine Hide and Move Silently into Stealth, and Listen and Spot into Notice.
 


Darklone said:
I like these skills in particular in low level pirate campaigns.
Care to share any specifics?

I guess it depends on just how low-level you're talking.

I did play in one game a few years ago that involved a chase across rooftops, at fourth level. There where a bunch of Jump checks, and pretty much after the sixth or so all of the PCs (and about half the NPC thieves) had ended up falling to street level and continuing from there. Three PCs fell to one longer jump (IIRC it was about DC 25, and probably the highest DC Jump check in the "obstacle course") that might have gotten them a lot closer to the thieves we where chasing, if they had made it. There where probably some Climb and/or Balance checks in there too, but we didn't end up facing them. One good thing was that the DM had set up a lot of hay-filled wagons, etc. for us to fall into (at least twords the start of the course, and since none of us made it that far...) so we were taking like 1d6 damage plus another 1d6 non-lethal from the falls. Maybe it was just bad luck, but it seems like when you're making multiple checks where you need a 5 or better, you'll eventually blow it.

Meanwhile, in a higher-level (18th) game I'm joining (or at least in theory) I've seen at least two characters with 30+ totals in Jump and Climb... Both also have items that let them fly... :uhoh:
 

I've been thinking the same thing about those 3 skills. But I'm going to run my upcoming saga game with the default rules and make any changes after a couple sessions (obviously if we ended up combining these skills players would get a refund on a trained skill if they took more than one of 'em).
I was thinking actually of just combining Jump/Climb and leaving swim as a seperate skill.
 

kaomera said:
I don't seem to see these skills actually used all that often when I run or play D&D. It isn't exactly rare, and my experiences may be well apart from the norm, but it seems to me that players will usually avoid having to make such a skill check it's at all possible (assuming that the check would not be an automatic success or nearly so). (And I believe that the aversion to Swim checks, which are much less likely to have a really bad result from a single check, may have more to what kinds of creepies might be lurking under the water's surface than anything else.) As a matter of fact, I'm fairly well convinced that these skills aren't really all that much fun in play. I mean, it's fine when you succeed, and it can certainly make for a bit of tension, but if you fail such a check (can't climb the wall {or even fall} / don't manage to get all the way across the chasm / go under and start to drown), that's not all that cool, right?

<snip>

So I was just kind of wondering what was up with that... I mean, you don't have to invest in such skills, but is seems like an obvious move for a lot of characters. But at the same time, while you want your character to be able to "do his own stunts" if you will, it's really only cool when the character just barely makes it up the side of the cliff by the skin of his teeth, not so much when he falls to his death...

Anyone have any thoughts on how to resolve this issue? Specifically, is there some good way to ensure that a botched Climb or Jump check isn't going to make the game less fun?
Interestingly enough, despite the fact that the rules provide that a botched check on even a marginally easy roll can lead to catastrophic results, and the rules don't allow characters to "take 10" if there is a consequence for failure, if an action like this isn't really difficult (particularly if a Take 10 would succeed), I don't require rolls. Generally speaking, I don't want a pointless fall or miss to kill a character. If the scenario requires tension, on the other hand... like it's in the middle of a chase or a fight...

Well, that's a different story. ;)
 

I tend to agree that these skills don't really add much to my games. (Be they 3e or another system with such skills.) I expect all PCs to be roughly competent at all of them. I'm not interested enough in variation in these areas to bother with.

But...to the "save or suck" aspect: I've been trying to use die rolls more often to determine partial success v. complete success (or no progress v. progress) rather than success v. failure.

For example: A successful jump roll might mean the PC is on the other side of a pit. A failed roll, that they're now dangling from the far edge.
 

Orryn Emrys said:
Interestingly enough, despite the fact that the rules provide that a botched check on even a marginally easy roll can lead to catastrophic results, and the rules don't allow characters to "take 10" if there is a consequence for failure, if an action like this isn't really difficult (particularly if a Take 10 would succeed), I don't require rolls.

I don't think your are prohibited from "Taking 10" if there is a consequence for failure (although you are prohibited from "taking 20"). As long as you are not threatened or distracted, you can take 10 even if there is a consequence for failure (exception, UMD unless you are a warlock or something).
 

Oh, & there's also this idea I've wanted to try. I think it was from Jonathan Tweet's web site:

A die roll determines whether the PC would succeed if he tried.

e.g.

(DC's & such are just pulled out of thin air. I'm going to admit to not being up on the 3.5e rules at the moment. So, don't look too closely at the details.)
DM: The thief leaps from this roof to the next. It's a pretty long jump. DC 25. About 20 feet away, there's a wooden plank spanning the gap.
Player: Let's see if I can jump the gap. (Rolls & fails.) Dang! I won't make the jump if I try it. I'll head towards the plank instead.
DM: It'll be a DC 25 balance check to cross at a run. If you walk, make it 20. If you go slowly, you can get it down to a 15.
Player: (Rolls a 23 on his balance check.) OK, I take it at a walk.

A failed roll might also cost some time. The PC balked & had to take a moment to consider rather than just acting immediately.

It could also be fun to give some kind of benison--XP, an "action point", or something--when a player chooses to take an action that the roll says will fail.
 

I will soon start an Eberron campaign where all the players are part of the crew of a pirate's ship. I combined Balance, Climb, Jump, Swim and Tumble into what I called "Acrotics". I wanted it to be a must have skill for all players. I'm eager to see if it's too much skills combined or if it's just right.
 

Remove ads

Top