I have consistently ruled (right or wrong - but you can help fix that now) that if a creature jumps off an elevated object, it takes falling damage in accordance with the rules dealing with falling and having acrobatics trained or not.
However, at my last game I tried a new creature that had a climb speed and a special jumping attack (witherlings). The witherlings climbed nearby 10' and 20' structures near the adventurers (an alley in a city) and then attempt to use their sudden leap to jump down the same distance behind the adventurers.
One of my players argued that if ~he~ had asked to do that, I would have made him roll falling damage vs his acrobatics. (He's probably right, as I've set a precedent for that before.) The best argument I had at the time was that the power actually said "jump" in the description, instead of a creature or player whose special ability does not designate "jump" wanting to jump down.
Distinction without a difference? Or are there rules that would differentiate the actions and subsequent damage.
. . .
For something to become hidden, it has to have the appropriate concealment and make a stealth check, or do something that removes it from line of sight totally, if I understand right.
In this case, one of the witherlings charged around the alley, behind a line of buildings where there was no line of sight, for all intents and purposes. After all, you can't discern its location at all, and removing the token removes the meta-issue of "hidden, but all the players are still looking at it."
When a creature becomes hidden, that creature's token can be removed from the board, correct? The same player made the comment that if a player tried to do that and remove themselves from the map, most DMs would cry foul. How do the rules cut on this one?
. . .
And just one more question, but totally opinion and not-rules: I had a couple geonids in a different encounter. My players' passive perception is unable to detect them, but within range of actually rolling for a few of them.
Is it "cheating" to let them run up to the geonids for "cover from behind a boulder" (when the players can't passive a threat) and then blast them with its nastiness? Or that's okay, from a design standpoint because lul...rkers...?
1. Jumping is not falling and don't generate damage, unless you run out of squares of movement while in midair.
Jumping is not falling. You made up a houserule and it was inconsistent with the system, which isn't unusual.
RAW, you know the location of every enemy in an encounter, whether you can see them or not. So "around a corner" is not reason enough to remove the token from the board. They must be Hidden. And they always know the square the creature became Hidden in, so unless they moved after the fact there is a 99% chance they are still in that square. This applies to PCs becoming Hidden, as well.
yeah, falling = damage and jumping = no damage. It's the difference between doing something on purpose and controlling said action vs not controlling anything and rolling acrobatics to try to regain said control. So a creature using a power that includes jumping would not require a damage roll since it's a controlled action. If that makes sense for you.
What Alcestis said, having superior cover or total concealment does not mean the players / monsters don't know where you are. You need to be hidden for that. LINK:
If a creature is hidden and no one is actively making perception checks then the stealth check is vs the creatures passive perception. If the stealth is better, then the token is not on the board and no one knows it's there. If on the other hand the creature just has total concealment or superior cover, everyone knows it's there. This is all explained in the link above. Happy reading
To confirm that I understand these points:
(1) A player is on a 10' ledge above the ground, and his turn begins; he has 6 squares of movement to spend. He declares he jumps down (1 square) and moves the remaining 5 squares of movement across the map.
He did not make a jump check, because he cleared 0 squares (a 10' vertical drop into the adjacent... column of squares). It was a willing movement, though, and does not count as falling, and does not incur falling damage as a result. So, unless intentional downward vertical movement is the result of forced movement, a player or creature should not take falling damage, or require an acrobatics check.
(1a) When the rules on a jump check (I don't have my compendium with me) say "clear a square" does that mean a square you enter, or a square you passed over?
Example: A player starts in square 1 and clears 3 squares (2, 3, 4) on a jump check, he lands in square 5. That's how I've been counting it, as a DM, and would like to clear that up since it's... tangentially relevant.
(2) Again, I am sans Compendium, please remind me if the Stealth check is part of the movement, or at the end of a movement to become hidden? That is probably where my biggest mistake has been. (Answer provided in the link that was posted while I was typing this one.)
"Jump down" is a specific thing covered by acrobatics called "Hop Down" (which it should be noted originally required training and no longer does). Jump across and jump up are athletics. But "across" can involve going down (not falling), based on various factors.
Originally it used to be that if you say, cleared 3 squares (DC 15 with a running start, you roll 15) you could land in square 3. So SXXL. Start, clear clear, land. You couldn't get to the next square unless you rolled a 16. The RC changed that, now you could "clear" three squares, landing in square 4. SXXXL. Minor change to make math faster clearer (though actually I am pretty sure that was always RAI and just explained poorly in the PHB). So yes your understanding is correct.
the squares of the jump are the counted squares just like regular movement. He jumps from the origin square, then you count the squares of movement of the jump. so a 3 square jump means he lands in square 3. If however the player was already moving before jumping, for example when making a running start jump, then you have to add those squares to the jump squares and see if the total is over the maximum movement of the player. If it is, then you count every square beyond the players movement as falling. At least that is my understanding.
To further support this, some powers have clauses that state that the character gets +10 on a jump check and can jump the total distance of the check even if that distance excedes the maximum movement of the jumper.
Does this mean that if i'm up on a 5 square ledge, with 0 acrobatics, and have a power that let's me "jump my speed", i can jump down 5 squares?
I know it sounds weird. But that's what it is. You don't take falling damage for using a power that lets you jump regardless of which direction you're jumping as long as you don't exceed your movement speed. Another example would be if you jump your speed directly up. You move your speed up but then you fall back down for the same distance and take damage since you've already moved your speed upwards.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.