D&D 5E Wait, what IS the point of Acrobatics?

Good examples of dex based athletics is what I am reading. ;)

I didn't think about it before it was mentioned in this thread, but merging Acrobatics/Athletics into one, and just calling it Dex(Athletics) or Str (Athletics) checks makes a lot of sense.

I have a player with a character in 4e with super-high Acrobatics and medium-high Athletics. He wants every check to be an Acrobatics-check. It's something like +11 vs +7. If I instead could ask for an Str(MergedAcrobaticsAthletics) check, he would get a +9 and it would make a lot more sense to me.

"Athletics. Your Strength (Athletics) check covers difficult situations you encounter while climbing, jumping, or swimming."

I can give you 5, 6, and 9 might be Athletics (since 5 is spelled out as an either/or, 6 involves climb, 9 jumping) but the other seven seem very much the area of twisting, coordination, and/or poise.

I'm not a giant fan of the "8-10 super skills, pick you modifier". It almost defeats the purpose. Everyone is going to try to max out said skills and then try to justify using their highest modifier. It means everyone is equally good and nobody fails. The current system is a bit granular, but vague enough I'm not trying to constantly find the DC for a 6" ledge during a rainstorm.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Part of the problem with Athletics and Acrobatics as skills is the difference doesn't seem very intuitive.

Okay, so jumping is supposed to be an athletic check. That means it relies on strength. So... strong people are automatically really good jumpers? By this logic, Arnold Schwarznegger should have been a world class long jumper in his prime.

Someone up-thread mentioned parkour as a possible example of something you'd use an acrobatics check for. Seems sensible until you realize that parkour mostly involves running and jumping (so once again, the Governator should be really good at it!).

Climbing is supposed to be Athletics which makes sense if you imagine a guy pulling himself up a rope but doesn't quite work for a lithe, ninja-like warrior finding hard-to-spot handholds on a cliff face. In fact I've house-ruled that climb can be from either skill.

From personal, 4e experience, I can tell you that the muddied distinction the game makes between these skills breaks down pretty quickly at the table. When you're trying to make a quick ruling and move on with the game, you (or at least I) am likely to say, "Aw, heck with it" and let the player make whichever check they prefer. At this point I'm about ready to start calling those skills 'Acroletics', or I would if my table hadn't just decided to ditch the skill system entirely for something else!
 

I'm in the minority here.

I like that athletics and acrobatics are two different skills.

I also think that some rare activities can be mirrored by either of these skills if the player gives a good rationale like climbing a tree, the athletics expert does a brute strength climb and the acrobatics expert swings from branch to branch. If the player wants to climb, its athletics as a general rule. That's the rule. Only in a few special circumstances (such as a player describing swinging from branch to branch) would I allow acrobatics.

But climbing is athletics. I see no need for house rules of using Dex with athletics.


I think some of the discontent here might stem from the idea that if a PC that wants to be able to do all of the movement physical skills of 5E, they have to take 2 skills and those 2 skills use different base ability scores.

Unlike the 4 knowledge skills in the game (arcana, history, nature, and religion that use intelligence), the 2 observational skills (perception and insight that use wisdom) and the 2 influence skills (persuasion and intimidation that use charisma). All of these similar skills use one ability score instead of two.
 

From personal, 4e experience, I can tell you that the muddied distinction the game makes between these skills breaks down pretty quickly at the table. When you're trying to make a quick ruling and move on with the game, you (or at least I) am likely to say, "Aw, heck with it" and let the player make whichever check they prefer. At this point I'm about ready to start calling those skills 'Acroletics', or I would if my table hadn't just decided to ditch the skill system entirely for something else!
Exactly. In 4e, one serves as the 'escape from a grab' skill for STR characters, the other for DEX characters, too. Once uncoupled from a specific stat, they might as well be the same skill.
 

I use Athletics and Acrobatics for very distinct things, personally.

Athletics is training in physical exertion. I call for Athletics checks when a character is either doing something which requires gross physical effort or when someone is trying to exert themselves to surpass the normal limits of what can be done.
Acrobatics is training in physical finesse. I call for Acrobatics checks when a character is doing something with their whole body that requires precision.
As a rule of thumb, an athletics check is all about the body in isolation. Whether you can lift yourself by the fingers of your left hand alone, for instance. It doesn't matter what you're gripping on to, so long as it can hold your weight.
Acrobatics checks are all about the body in the context of the world. Whether you can swing from this bar and land on that ledge is a unique situation that depends upon the exact placement of the ledge and the bar.

An example:

Tim is a High Elf Rogue, trained in both Athletics and Acrobatics. Tim is being chased through a city at night by a dozen cultists who know that the way to a man's heart is through his stomach.
Tim is running across a rooftop and comes to the edge. There's a 10' gap to the next building. Jumping it is purely a matter of whether he can make the distance or not - a Strength[Athletics] check, which he makes easily.
The new building is straight and very long, and Tim realizes he has a chance to get a bit of a lead on the cultists. He attempts to run faster than he would normally be able to, a difficult Dexterity[Athletics] check. He's lucky and makes it, beginning to pull ahead of the cultists. He tries to keep this up for the next round, but fails the necessary Constitution[Athletics] check (Straying away into houseruling, I'd happily allow a player to automatically succeed on a check like this... in return for taking a rank of Exhaustion until the end of the next short rest).
Unfortunately his luck has run out a bit - he reaches the end of the building and there is no next one, only a 60' drop. There is, however, a flagpole 5' away from the roof. Tim tries to jump and grab onto it. This jump requires aiming more than exertion, so he makes Dexterity[Acrobatics] check and passes by a good margin. Once on the pole, he starts to climb down (Strength[Athletics]). Half-way down the pole, he sees a group of cultists have arrived on the street below at a run and are loading crossbows. He looks around and sees a boarded-up window on the building. He attempts to swing around the pole and crash through the window board (a Strength[Acrobatics] check, since it's a matter of the precise application of force). He just fails though, knocking the board away but having to make a Dexterity saving throw to grab the window ledge. Failing that, he falls 15' down the wall of the building before managing a Strength saving throw to catch on to the back of an advertising board on the side of the building. Thinking quickly, he uses his Minor Illusion cantrip to make the sound of a crunch on the ground below, followed by running footsteps. Most of the cultists fall for it, running down the street away in the direction of the "footsteps". The last cultist, though, seems to be suspicious, poking around on the ground and examining the building. Tim flattens himself against the advertising board and makes a Dexterity[Stealth] check to hide there, passing very well. However, the cultist continues to investigate the area, looking at the advertising board as if suspicious.
Holding himself completely still is taking its toll on Tim; he makes a Constitution[Acrobatics] check to hold himself absolutely motionless. Luckily he makes it, and after another glance around the area the final cultist leaves.
Tim waits a short while, then drops to the ground as quietly as he can and sneaks away into the shadows (Dexterity[Stealth]) to make his way to the inn his friends are staying at.

Of course, the whole issue here is a playstyle question, so there's no wrong answer. If it makes sense in your game to merge Athletics and Acrobatics, then you definitely should do it. I'm just trying to illustrate that the 5e default has useful mechanical separation. I'd also say it's a lot easier to merge two skills than to split out a single one, because it's easier to see that two concepts are related than to see exactly the right place to split a single overarching concept.
 

for those characters that want to run around and fight like Ezio Auditore from Assassins Creed...

Parkour-ing, running up the back of a Giant to stab him in the back of the neck after he swag and missed a friend of yours, sliding between an orc's legs, and so on

Yeah, and I think the opening sequence of Casino Royale is a really good example of athletics vs acrobatics. Mollaka flips, dives, somersaults and climbs in unconventional ways through the construction site, whereas Bond either just runs fast, crashes through doors or jumps to keep up. Watch the sequence and you'll see what I'm talking about.

How does this translate to DnD?
Running, climbing, throwing, jumping can be done with either.
Swimming, pushing/pulling/lifting can only be done with Athletics.
Accelerated climbing, accelerated squeezing through spaces can only be done with Acrobatics. In fact, as long as theres more than one surface or weight-bearing object within 5' (like a floor and a mast or even a floor and a ceiling), I'd probably consider allowing acrobatics to move through spaces without attracting AoA and grant advantage on an attack. Not sure how I'd do the DC. Probably a sliding "hard" DC.
 
Last edited:

I use Athletics and Acrobatics for very distinct things, personally.

Athletics is training in physical exertion. I call for Athletics checks when a character is either doing something which requires gross physical effort or when someone is trying to exert themselves to surpass the normal limits of what can be done.
Acrobatics is training in physical finesse. I call for Acrobatics checks when a character is doing something with their whole body that requires precision.
As a rule of thumb, an athletics check is all about the body in isolation. Whether you can lift yourself by the fingers of your left hand alone, for instance. It doesn't matter what you're gripping on to, so long as it can hold your weight.
Acrobatics checks are all about the body in the context of the world. Whether you can swing from this bar and land on that ledge is a unique situation that depends upon the exact placement of the ledge and the bar.

An example:

I want this explanation and example to appear in the 2nd printing of the PHB. Fantastically done.
 

As a rule of thumb, an athletics check is all about the body in isolation. Whether you can lift yourself by the fingers of your left hand alone, for instance. It doesn't matter what you're gripping on to, so long as it can hold your weight.
Acrobatics checks are all about the body in the context of the world. Whether you can swing from this bar and land on that ledge is a unique situation that depends upon the exact placement of the ledge and the bar.

I like your explanation. It's just lacking a reason to separate the two in the first place.

On the level of abstraction the other skills are operating at, two skills for covering 'coordination and physical movement', doing basically the same thing, is superfluous.

It'd be different if they'd hard-coded exact, different mechanical effects behind each (like avoiding AoOs or falling damage, and that is all Acrobatics does, then we'd be in the clear and it's an actual choice to make).
 

I like your explanation. It's just lacking a reason to separate the two in the first place.

On the level of abstraction the other skills are operating at, two skills for covering 'coordination and physical movement', doing basically the same thing, is superfluous.

It'd be different if they'd hard-coded exact, different mechanical effects behind each (like avoiding AoOs or falling damage, and that is all Acrobatics does, then we'd be in the clear and it's an actual choice to make).

Well, no. I gave quite a number of reasons to separate the two skills. What's more, I demonstrated a number of exact different mechanical effects.

As I said, there's absolutely nothing wrong with merging the two skills if that's the right thing for your game. Declaring that there's no reason or difference between them indicates you believe there is something wrong with leaving them together... when several people have explained that there is a difference in play and there are reasons to have them separate in their games.

In short, please accept that other people's playstyles exist. A preference isn't the same as an absolute truth.
 

In short, please accept that other people's playstyles exist. A preference isn't the same as an absolute truth.

I wasn't calling you badwrongfun, sorry if it came across that way.

I am just literally not seeing the function or design space for the skill as is.
 

Remove ads

Top