D&D 4E Weekly Wrecana : The world is not made of numbers

[Garthanos]

The scene should be presented therefore in terms relative to the character's abilities ... Players who want to climb onto your coffee table and jump across your living room to prove that their character could jump over the chasm have probably missed the whole point of the story.[/indent]
(Which is not to say it's a bad idea!)

Reminds me of highschool roleplaying where we figured out how slow the D&D characters were moving and changed the melee round very promptly.
and I started using square cube laws and physics to compute movement and jumping vs strength and similar things....

LOL blast from the past

 

[pemerton]

Right, in my own 4e (and not-quite-4e) GMing I don't really hold with concepts like "A check result of 24 means you jumped 4 squares!" anymore. Instead a DV (I never understood the acronym 'DC' BTW, its a 'difficulty value' or maybe 'difficulty level', what does it have to do with 'class'?) of 19 might represent the number you need to achieve to leap across the 'dangerous chasm' (exact definition of which, in terms of the battle map in a combat for instance being dependent on tier and genre/tone of the game in hand) successfully.

I've ended up stuck with the RAW jump rules, by dint of use and a somewhat fetishistic concern that they contribute to the balance of the combat action economy.

I regard this as one of the (several) places where the different approaches 4e takes to combat and non-combat resolution is a source of weakness/incoherence rather than strength.

 

[S'mon]

I quite like the battlemap telling me what the jump DC is without me having to make it up or look it up. The actual results from "d20 roll = feet jumped" are pretty silly, though, but thinking of it as DC "5 per square cleared" works a bit better, so 5-9 = 1 square/5'; 10-14 = 2 squares/10', 15-19 = 3 squares/15'.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I've ended up stuck with the RAW jump rules, by dint of use and a somewhat fetishistic concern that they contribute to the balance of the combat action economy.

I regard this as one of the (several) places where the different approaches 4e takes to combat and non-combat resolution is a source of weakness/incoherence rather than strength.

I quite like the battlemap telling me what the jump DC is without me having to make it up or look it up. The actual results from "d20 roll = feet jumped" are pretty silly, though, but thinking of it as DC "5 per square cleared" works a bit better, so 5-9 = 1 square/5'; 10-14 = 2 squares/10', 15-19 = 3 squares/15'.

Seems to me the "1' per point of check result" is an OK guideline, at least for most heroic tier play. I understand why they set it up that way, as it dovetails well with the very nailed-down power stuff. You always know what you're going to get when you try something and you don't have to play the 'GM permission game' at all. It just becomes a bit too prescriptive and, as [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] notes, doesn't cohere well with the rest of the more relativistic and fairly abstract aspects of 4e non-combat.

I think my answer is to always describe any situation like this in terms of what 'level' it is. I don't specify DVs, I specify level of challenge. So I can say "its a level 12 leap" and a player with a 4th level character knows he's a bit out of his league, but I can still describe to him the math of what his chances are. If he then looks at the battle map (assuming its a combat and there is one) he can relate that back to a specific distance. I'd note though that this means I don't have to be 100% consistent, although obviously I should be ready to explain why THIS 40' leap is harder than THAT one if it comes to that.

 

[Rolenet]

A DV of 19 might represent the number you need to achieve to leap across the 'dangerous chasm' (exact definition of which, in terms of the battle map in a combat for instance being dependent on tier and genre/tone of the game in hand)

There's that table in the 4e DMG which tells how high falls should be according to level, to keep players safe, but on their toes. This is one of the many things that sold me to this game: so refreshing compared to other more classic "physics" rules. (I remember a 80s French game which had complex derived stats for long jump, high jump, standing or running, measured in centimeters...).

Sadly, some published encounters didn't stick to this idea. (and don't get me started on the hilariously Bruce-y cliff reference in the Warlock-29 Curse of the Dark Delirium)