I see what you're trying to say, but that's a strawman argument and isn't really applicable here.Simple comparison. If I said spell slots can't ever be used to cast a spell greater than 4th level, would you disagree that this rule is slanted against full casters? I mean half casters would lose out on those 5th level spells a few levels later...
Full casters gain access to 5th level spells at 9th level, whereas half casters have to wait til 17th. Obviously, full casters are more impacted than half casters by such a change, insofar as that goes.
If you take average HP, a fighter gains 1 more per level than a bard, cleric, or warlock. Even the widest disparity, that between the barbarian and a sorcerer or wizard, is only 3 hp per level. Constitution is valuable to all classes, so there's no guarantee that the martial will have a better score than a caster.
At 1 hp per level, it will take a long time for the fighter to reach a point where he can definitely survive the fall, and even when he does the warlock is not far behind. The warlock isn't guaranteed to survive the fall, but odds are that his 101 hp will keep him safe.
Moreover, at many tables HP are still rolled. Meaning that with luck, a wizard can have more HP than a barbarian.
No feature functions in such an arbitrary manner. Actual features are things you have or don't, like rage or uncanny dodge or having three 1st level spell slots.
This would be like a fighter rolling a 1d6 at 5th level. On a 1 he doesn't gain extra attack, on a 2-5 he gains extra attack, and on a 6 he gains extra attack 2.
HP are often rolled, and therefore subject to the vagaries of chance, unlike features. Hence, I disagree that they are even a feature to begin with.
It's not the DM's intent that is the issue. It is the player's. IMO, metagaming is not something to be encouraged.The existence of such a master requires truly implausible fiction; as an item the ability is just as bad. Consider the options when you fall.
1. With ability, slip and fall, 20d6 damage. You survive!
2. With ability, jump, 0 damage. You survive!
3. Without ability, slip and fall, 20d6 damage. You survive!
4. Without ability, jump. You die...
So at a certain level, you are safer when you are clumsy.
To make it clear, if falls are going to be 100% deadly at a certain height(debatable), then they should just be deadly. Intent-based deadliness moves the DM's interventions into the foreground where they don't belong. At that point your character might as well die from impact with a spectral hand flipping the player the bird from beyond the fourth wall.
Yeah, having your barbarian face plant and take a ton of damage is way cooler than them striking the ground as they land, cracking the ground around them, and standing up without a scratch.Here's the thing..Captain America has no such special ability.. He can do it because he's tough enough and skillful enough (probably has a lot of hp).
Besides which, players will decide what they think is cool for their characters. And there is plenty of precedent for the coolness of a hero who just keeps getting up no matter what (in fact, a certain Captain comes to mind..).
I'm frankly surprised that you're disagreeing with me so vehemently on this point. You seem like you are arguing for martials to have nice things. I'm saying that if you want them to have nice things then give them nice things rather than utilizing half measures.
HP soaking jumping off a cliff is a half measure (even if you make hp a force field or equivalent). The character lands prone and takes a ton of damage. That's not cool.
If you want martials to be able to jump off of cliffs, actually give them the capability to do so rather than forcing them to land on their faces. You don't have to use an ancient master or magic item either. Just say that all martials get this as a new class feature.
As for why it works when you jump but not when you trip, it involves the character making a focused strike at the ground as they land, directing all of their energy into the ground (in flagrant disregard to the laws of physics). Because it requires a focused strike on impact, you can't do it while tumbling through the air (falling).
As I explained above, hit points are not a special feature. What kind of special feature gives the barbarian's feature to the wizard if the barbarian consistently rolls low on level up and the wizard consistently rolls high?So abilities which have zero RL parallels are more believable than things that have actually happened in RL....ok? If that's how y'all roll..
(Also, If we need a 'special ability', we could just do this..
Legendary Toughness: when you gain a level, your max hp increases by 1d12+your constitution modifier, which allows you to survive when lesser creatures would perish....)
Also, it sounds like you're suggesting HP as a force field equivalent, which I've already stated isn't my cup of tea but does make jumping off a cliff plausible. If you want to go with HP making you nigh indestructible, don't let me stop you.
As I've stated numerous times, I'm approaching this based on the idea that HP primarily represent skill and luck. Meaning that high HP doesn't give you unbreakable bones or a force field or whatever.
"Flying" by catapult was not the question. In other words, you wouldn't just let them spend HP to fly or teleport. You might allow movement if there is sufficient narrative justification for it (the aforementioned catapult), but they can't just spend HP and fly into the air.Like for instance at the end of a giant club?
That was a (stolen) joke, but high level barbarians without spell support often have to resort to dangerous and stupid plans to attack flying creatures (get thrown, loaded in catapults and cannons, strapping rockets to themselves, other methods involving explosives). Very frequently these result in hp damage. .which is both fun..and heroic..
So in answer to your question, sure I would, if they're gonna take the risks and live with the consequences.
IMO, the dumb thing is almost inevitably just an excuse to metagame. People don't jump off of high cliffs, without safety gear, expecting to survive.First, I've never contended that taking the leap is smart. But then, neither are barbarians.
Second, there are no 'real people' in D&D settings. All characters are fictional, unless I've badly misunderstood reality.
Third, even so far as there are 'common people' in a D&D setting, PCs are not that, especially by the time where max fall damage is survivable.
As such, I disagree with your opinion on what a fictional character with capabilities waaaayy beyond those of a common person would 'never do' in a D&D setting.
Because in one circumstance, the player derives no benefit (i.e. no exploit), and in the other case they do (exploit).
I agree. I'm not advocating actual exploits like pre-reading adventures, or memorizing monster stat blocks, etc.. I'm suggesting that
1. The character sheet broadly reflects what characters know about themselves, at least in a, 'I'm pretty tough"/"I've got some skills"/"I'm about to die" kind of way. I think this is pretty fundamental to RPGs in general, but especially to D&D. Basically this is D&D functioning as intended.
2. The characters living in the setting have enough experience with the physics of that setting to have some frame of reference for how much potential damage could result from a fall. More controversial, but insofar as the damage rules represent physical reality for the setting, I don't think it's that radical an assertion.
3. There's no advantage gained. In the best case scenario, the character still takes a lot of damage, for a gain of some small amount of time alone at the base of a cliff. It's a dumb thing done by a dumb character that harms no one.
1. Some awareness is reasonable yes. The PC knowing their HP total is not reasonable.
2. No, I do not think that this is reasonable at all. The rules are a gamist abstraction, not the physics of the game. Even if they were, to figure out the 20d6 cap would require a ludicrous amount of experimentation. 20d6 can deal 20 to 120 damage. Just because the dice rolled low and you survived this time is no guarantee of next time.
How does that "dumb" barbarian even figure all this out? Is he only dumb when it's a convenient excuse to metagame, and Isaac Newton the rest of the time?
3. It doesn't matter that there's no advantage gained. Metagaming is harmful even when there is no advantage. If a character dives headfirst off a 19 ft roof repeatedly for no reason (because it's only 1d6 damage and they have plenty of HP to spare) that harms everyone's experience at the table, despite not giving that player any advantage.
It's essentially in-person trolling. I've had a few players like this at my tables over the years and they never last long. One's fun should not come at the expense of others.
IIRC, the player grabbed two d20s (assuming they would roll with advantage). If I were that player, I would have asked, "Do I get advantage because he's asleep?"IIRC, the player asked about the unconscious condition and whether they should roll under the guidelines of that condition, which I think is a reasonable response when you're about to roll dice and all the information you have to that point suggests that you should roll a particular way but your DM hasn't confirmed that for you.
At some point, if the creatures were faking being asleep, or got rustled by a bad stealth roll or whatever, the DM should let the players know that was the case. Otherwise you get this justifiable mechanical confusion unsupported by the fiction.