I understand real world strength and athletics at the highest levels. It's what I do professionally.
I'd offer that the best option would be to allow players to use EITHER Strength--Athletics OR Dexterity--Acrobatics.
Here's my simple take. There's no need to get more real world on it because I assure you, it is significantly more complicated than you think (strength, endurance, mobility, flexibility, grip endurance, pull strength, hang strength, lactic threshold, mental fatigue, nervous system issues, sleep, nutrition, durability, tendon/joint/ligament strength, absolute strength, raw strength, overall bodyweight, coordination, etc.)..ANYWAY
When I think Acrobat, I'd explain it to a 7yr old as, "the guys/gals that do stuff in Cirque Du Soleil." They are acrobatics. They primarily pull from gymnasts, climbers, bodyweight specialists (more street than olympic), contortionists, and of course, performers, circus experts, balance experts, etc. That's a broad view. So notice-
ACROBATS and CLIMBERS. There are elite climbers in Cirque. They are all acrobatic. Therefore, when it comes to climbing, it fits the bill because Cirque folk are among the most acrobatic on the planet and are made up of many disciplines, among them, high level climbers. The same could be said for Ninja Warrior folk.
Now, Athletics. Athletics, and its attachment to Strength in D&D means...IT'S STRENGTH. I've worked with, alongside, studied, and spent time with nearly elite level climbers. I'm not talking Adam Ondra or Alex Honnold, but better than 90% of the world's population. They are TREMENDOUSLY strong. Granted, they can't out backsquat or deadlift me but there's a VERY SMALL population of people on this earth that can out backsquat me while weighing what your average high level climber weighs. Point is, you have to define strength. What is strong? What movements indicate strength?
Again, as someone that lives and breathes this, an iron cross is strong, as is a 900lb Deadlift, as is a 1-arm muscle up. As is someone that can hang by their top digit on a ledge for 30 seconds. That's not acrobatic. That's STRENGTH. Tendon, ligament, and pure strength. Demonstrable. Therefore, Strength applies to climbing.
Notice all those examples favor Power, Pang. Weightlifting requires you to defeat the weight of what you're lifting, not the weight of your own personal self. Stuff-Chucking contests are also about Power, since they're about defeating the weight of the thing being chucked as thoroughly as possible. And "Strongman" competitions are nothing but displays of raw power.
Look at Olympic runners, swimmers, biathletes, or other athletes in track-and-field type competitions. Are they all roided-out muscle mountains? or are they all generally as lean as they can reasonably get, shaving down body weight as much as they can while remaining healthy?
Yes, when it comes to exerting physical effort against a fixed object in the world - breaking doors, moving rocks, lifting or throwing shit - then larger creatures with a greater absolute mass of muscle are going to be better. But when it comes to endurance sports, track and field? The less mass you're carrying the better off you are. You still need strength, training and conditioning, and in some cases the lessened reach or stride length of a halfling track athlete will be an issue. But this whole "Small species aren't allowed to have Strength scores over 12 because it's just not realistic!" thing everybody's so goddamned keen on is garbage. Not to mention the issue Toast brought up of Tiny creatures known for being fantastic jumpers and climbers being actually extremely terrible at both those things, in 5e terms.
Do most DMs just ignore those numbers and let the critters do them? Sure. But why can a DM justify doing that whilst also telling the guy who wants to make a halfling rogue proficient in Athletics and second-story work that ackchualy, they can't do that because halflings are all universally weak and can't possess Strength scores above 12?
High strength isn't necessarily the same as "roided out muscle-mountain" though. And a lot of those atheletic contests rely on more than just power to weight ratio. Running (as you say) will be affected by stride length, and swimming (in most situations an adventurer will be using it) will likely be competing against the srength of waves or current.
Plus, almost all other uses of STR in D&D will be "exerting physical effort against a fixed object in the world" rather than based on power/weight ratios.
So I think the best way to deal with this would be to stick with the principle that small and tiny creatures should (on average) have low(er) strength, but give them specific bonuses to skills and checks where small size, high strength/weigh ratios, or physiology would give a benefit to that specific activity. (E.g. Halfling Nimbleness could also give proficiency to Althletics checks for climbing). And if a creature has a climb speed (e.g. cats), then presumably it shouldn't be making climb checks for climbing anything that it should expect to be able to climb.
This Daniel Woods you're referring probably also has a strength score around 14ish and not around 8-10 that people tend to dump their dexterity characters to.
I would call this dude strong rather than dexterous if I had to pick one, but he's obviously both.
Something that could be done, that might not break the 5e game design of simplicity, is to have two strength scores, one that is an absolute strength score and a strength score that is relative to creature size.
Whenever you'd do something that only affects yourself which requires strength, like climbing or jumping, you'd use the relative strength score.
Whenever you were to use your strength to affect something that's not your own body, you'd use your absolute strength score.
To not have this being a nerf to strength characters in general, we'd have to do something similar for other stats, or we'd have to weaken dexterity, perhaps by making it so dexterity doesn't count as the damage modifier for dexterity based weapons, but only counts for the attack modifier.
Also moving initiative to be based on intelligence or wisdom instead.
Perhaps we'd also do something along the lines of finding some more skills that can be based on strength instead of just the one we have so far. In general we could use some more love for athletic characters in general in the game design.
Something that could be done, that might not break the 5e game design of simplicity, is to have two strength scores, one that is an absolute strength score and a strength score that is relative to creature size.
I don't think that's worth the additional hassle.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Something that could be done, that might not break the 5e game design of simplicity, is to have two strength scores, one that is an absolute strength score and a strength score that is relative to creature size.
Already exists, carrying capacity is modified by size. It's just that it isn't applied for Small vs Medium.
There is nothing stopping you from having a 5 foot tall, 50kg dwarf, human, elf, halfling, or gnome. The elf, human and dwarf would be medium while the halfling and gnome would be small. Nothing links the terminology to the chosen statistics. The tallest gnome would be larger than the shortest human. Really it should be set by a range something like under 5 foot equals small, 5 to 7 equals medium etc. Then if you make a balanced set of pros and cons it becomes a consideration when making your character. There has been a bit of talk about removing race as a consideration for stats, there should be massive variation within any population. Back ground and profession matter but race shouldn't.
Something that could be done, that might not break the 5e game design of simplicity, is to have two strength scores, one that is an absolute strength score and a strength score that is relative to creature size.
Already exists, carrying capacity is modified by size. It's just that it isn't applied for Small vs Medium.
Nor is it applied to instances where a character has to lift their own body such as jumping or climbing which is kinda the problem.
I wonder how many the people arguing that climbing is DEX-based actually ever tried climbing in their life, anyone who has will know that it’s very definitely STR-based, this a perfect example of Athletics check, Acrobatics might help you land in a way that avoids damage if you fall but it won’t get you up the wall. Strength relative to your body mass comes into play here too but even taking that into account it’s still a strength-based skill, I would just use the DC differences to accommodate the fact that it’s easier for a lighter character to scale the same wall than for a heavier one.
Cats are good at climbing because they have claws, that gives way more advantage than their strength or dexterity does, it’s a mechanical solution, not ability-based, if you give a human boots and gloves that imitate cat’s claws, they’d be able to scale a tree without major problems as well, arguing that cats are good are something doesn’t transfer to the discussion of humans being good at the same thing.
I wonder how many the people arguing that climbing is DEX-based actually ever tried climbing in their life, anyone who has will know that it’s very definitely STR-based, this a perfect example of Athletics check, Acrobatics might help you land in a way that avoids damage if you fall but it won’t get you up the wall. Strength relative to your body mass comes into play here too but even taking that into account it’s still a strength-based skill, I would just use the DC differences to accommodate the fact that it’s easier for a lighter character to scale the same wall than for a heavier one.
Cats are good at climbing because they have claws, that gives way more advantage than their strength or dexterity does, it’s a mechanical solution, not ability-based, if you give a human boots and gloves that imitate cat’s claws, they’d be able to scale a tree without major problems as well, arguing that cats are good are something doesn’t transfer to the discussion of humans being good at the same thing.
Was just about to say something similar, linking size to climbing while ignoring things like4 feet and claws doesn't set a good base for the argument. Wonder if OP's ever seen a bear climb a tree.. they are pretty big and really strong but having 4 feet and claws sure is an advantage they and cats share vs say a human
I wonder how many the people arguing that climbing is DEX-based actually ever tried climbing in their life, anyone who has will know that it’s very definitely STR-based, this a perfect example of Athletics check, Acrobatics might help you land in a way that avoids damage if you fall but it won’t get you up the wall. Strength relative to your body mass comes into play here too but even taking that into account it’s still a strength-based skill, I would just use the DC differences to accommodate the fact that it’s easier for a lighter character to scale the same wall than for a heavier one.
Cats are good at climbing because they have claws, that gives way more advantage than their strength or dexterity does, it’s a mechanical solution, not ability-based, if you give a human boots and gloves that imitate cat’s claws, they’d be able to scale a tree without major problems as well, arguing that cats are good are something doesn’t transfer to the discussion of humans being good at the same thing.
This thread is not about arguing for dex being using for climbing, so why are you even starting with that premise. The reason dex was brought up at all is because the disucssion surrounding dex vs strength for climbing comes from a similar place as this discussion, and that one might argue that dex is the best indicator of strength vs body weight... but it is not the topic of this thread. Strength is important for climbing, but it strength relative to your own weight, which is not reflected in how 5e handles strength, and that is the point of the thread. It is a fact that being larger makes it more difficult to lift your own weight and therefore requires more stength to compensate for that issue.
Cats are good at climbing because they have claws AND because their strength is rather large compared to their weight relative to humans. And I wasn't even using cats as my example for climbing, I was using them as my example for jumping. Also, this thread is not about humans either.. it is specifically about creatures that are smaller than medium like cats and squirrels, because the strength system is not set up to work for them.
Was just about to say something similar, linking size to climbing while ignoring things like4 feet and claws doesn't set a good base for the argument. Wonder if OP's ever seen a bear climb a tree.. they are pretty big and really strong but having 4 feet and claws sure is an advantage they and cats share vs say a human
Yes I've seen these videos before... what on earth makes you think I'm ignoring things like claws and having more feet? Obviously claws are an advantage when climbing, that is entirely irrelevant to the point I was making in the opening post of this thread.
I was specifically highlighting the problem that having the strength stat not reflect strength relative to weight and still have it determine how far you can jump or how easily you can climb is a major problem for creatures which are smaller than your average human in 5e... Yes, claws are great, this is why these creatures often have a climbspeed, you are trying to dismiss my point without actually addressing it at all.
Let me boil the problem down for both you;
A human with a strength 3 of will have difficulty lifting themselves and unable to jump far, because a strength of 3 is supposed to reflect a strength below the human average.
A cat with a strength of 3 should not have difficulty lifting itself and will have the ability to jump well, because a strength lower than the human average is still incredibly strong relative to the cat's weight.
In 5e, that is not the case, a cat and a human, both with a strength of 3 will have similar climbing rolls, and be be equally poor at jumping. Climbing can, with a forgiving DM, be compensated for by setting the DC low, but that is not the case with jumping.
The problem being addressed isn't whether strength is important to climbing or jumping, but that body mass makes a bigger difference than a flat measure of strength. The closest comparison I can make might look like:
I am 6 feet tall and 150 pounds and I can pick up a rock that weighs 150 pounds (and no more). My D&D Str is 8 My companion is 8 feet tall and 350 pounds and he can pick up a rock that weighs 150 pounds (and no more). His D&D Str is 8 When we go to climb a rope, or cliff or jump over a gap, I am willing to bet I can climb farther, faster and much easier than him and I bet I can jump farther than him, too.
The issue being addressed is that there really isn't a GOOD mechanic, using the stats as presented, to represent a lot of "athletics" type activities, specifically related to the size of the creature. Strength, as demonstrated above, is used for other more direct measures, and Dexterity ignores the strength requirements inherent to the tasks. It's one of those weird, grey areas that DM's need to (or maybe should) address on the cases it comes up.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
The problem being addressed isn't whether strength is important to climbing or jumping, but that body mass makes a bigger difference than a flat measure of strength. The closest comparison I can make might look like:
I am 6 feet tall and 150 pounds and I can pick up a rock that weighs 150 pounds (and no more). My D&D Str is 8 My companion is 8 feet tall and 350 pounds and he can pick up a rock that weighs 150 pounds (and no more). His D&D Str is 8 When we go to climb a rope, or cliff or jump over a gap, I am willing to bet I can climb farther, faster and much easier than him and I bet I can jump farther than him, too.
The issue being addressed is that there really isn't a GOOD mechanic, using the stats as presented, to represent a lot of "athletics" type activities, specifically related to the size of the creature. Strength, as demonstrated above, is used for other more direct measures, and Dexterity ignores the strength requirements inherent to the tasks. It's one of those weird, grey areas that DM's need to (or maybe should) address on the cases it comes up.
You and your companion are the same size for game purposes (Medium) even if he weighs twice as much as you do. If you were a 4'2" Str 12 halfling weighing 120 lbs and I was a 5' 3' Str 12 human weighing 100 lbs, I could probably outclimb you quite handily, though you'd still be Small and I'd still be Medium. There's been a whole train of thought in this thread (and others) over Size and stats, but it doesn't work that way.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
In 5e, that is not the case, a cat and a human, both with a strength of 3 will have similar climbing rolls, and be be equally poor at jumping. Climbing can, with a forgiving DM, be compensated for by setting the DC low, but that is not the case with jumping.
For jumping, a rabbit or frog are likely the better comparisons.
It should also be noted that a cat loaded down with the same proportional mass as an adventurer typically carries in their pack would also have a much harder time of it, even scaling down the gear and provision weights.
I think a cat a perfectly fine example for jumping, they are known to be great jumpings and can jump higher than your average human... But feel free to replace it with a rabbit in your mind... The specific small animal is not the point xD... The point is that 5e does not handle strength well when it comes to lifting your own body for creatures that are significantly smaller than a human
And yea, a cat having to carry an external weight will function similar to a human.. again, not what we are talking about :)
This is specficially about the strength calculation for carrying your own body weight not working when we apply it to creatures that are not roughly human sized.
The problem being addressed isn't whether strength is important to climbing or jumping, but that body mass makes a bigger difference than a flat measure of strength. The closest comparison I can make might look like:
I am 6 feet tall and 150 pounds and I can pick up a rock that weighs 150 pounds (and no more). My D&D Str is 8 My companion is 8 feet tall and 350 pounds and he can pick up a rock that weighs 150 pounds (and no more). His D&D Str is 8 When we go to climb a rope, or cliff or jump over a gap, I am willing to bet I can climb farther, faster and much easier than him and I bet I can jump farther than him, too.
The issue being addressed is that there really isn't a GOOD mechanic, using the stats as presented, to represent a lot of "athletics" type activities, specifically related to the size of the creature. Strength, as demonstrated above, is used for other more direct measures, and Dexterity ignores the strength requirements inherent to the tasks. It's one of those weird, grey areas that DM's need to (or maybe should) address on the cases it comes up.
You and your companion are the same size for game purposes (Medium) even if he weighs twice as much as you do. If you were a 4'2" Str 12 halfling weighing 120 lbs and I was a 5' 3' Str 12 human weighing 100 lbs, I could probably outclimb you quite handily, though you'd still be Small and I'd still be Medium. There's been a whole train of thought in this thread (and others) over Size and stats, but it doesn't work that way.
This is not just about player characters.. it's about any instance where the athletic abilities of smaller creatures come into play.. be in with familiars, a druid wild shaping.. anything really.
It's not even just smaller creatues, the system breaks for larger creatures aswell.. A mammoth or a t-rex both have huge strength stats and are therefore incredibly athletics, because of the same issue of athletics not taking their body weight into account.
There is a certain room in which we can suspend our disbelief.. would an orc be heavier than an elf? probably.. But having them behave the same for mechanical reasons is within reason... But can we suspend our disbelief and act as if a cat or a rabbit weighs the same mechanically as an adult human? I certainly find it very strange and offputting.
I think we are all aware that 5e doesnt work in a way where weight makes athletics require more or less strength, and that is the problem. The thing is that the athletics system was set up to work just fine with player characters, but as soon as you need to apply the same rules creatures of sizes that are not common to players, we run into problems.
The problem being addressed isn't whether strength is important to climbing or jumping, but that body mass makes a bigger difference than a flat measure of strength. The closest comparison I can make might look like:
I am 6 feet tall and 150 pounds and I can pick up a rock that weighs 150 pounds (and no more). My D&D Str is 8 My companion is 8 feet tall and 350 pounds and he can pick up a rock that weighs 150 pounds (and no more). His D&D Str is 8 When we go to climb a rope, or cliff or jump over a gap, I am willing to bet I can climb farther, faster and much easier than him and I bet I can jump farther than him, too.
The issue being addressed is that there really isn't a GOOD mechanic, using the stats as presented, to represent a lot of "athletics" type activities, specifically related to the size of the creature. Strength, as demonstrated above, is used for other more direct measures, and Dexterity ignores the strength requirements inherent to the tasks. It's one of those weird, grey areas that DM's need to (or maybe should) address on the cases it comes up.
The problem being addressed isn't whether strength is important to climbing or jumping, but that body mass makes a bigger difference than a flat measure of strength. The closest comparison I can make might look like:
I am 6 feet tall and 150 pounds and I can pick up a rock that weighs 150 pounds (and no more). My D&D Str is 8 My companion is 8 feet tall and 350 pounds and he can pick up a rock that weighs 150 pounds (and no more). His D&D Str is 8 When we go to climb a rope, or cliff or jump over a gap, I am willing to bet I can climb farther, faster and much easier than him and I bet I can jump farther than him, too.
The issue being addressed is that there really isn't a GOOD mechanic, using the stats as presented, to represent a lot of "athletics" type activities, specifically related to the size of the creature. Strength, as demonstrated above, is used for other more direct measures, and Dexterity ignores the strength requirements inherent to the tasks. It's one of those weird, grey areas that DM's need to (or maybe should) address on the cases it comes up.
You and your companion are the same size for game purposes (Medium) even if he weighs twice as much as you do. If you were a 4'2" Str 12 halfling weighing 120 lbs and I was a 5' 3' Str 12 human weighing 100 lbs, I could probably outclimb you quite handily, though you'd still be Small and I'd still be Medium. There's been a whole train of thought in this thread (and others) over Size and stats, but it doesn't work that way.
This is not just about player characters.. it's about any instance where the athletic abilities of smaller creatures come into play.. be in with familiars, a druid wild shaping.. anything really.
It's not even just smaller creatues, the system breaks for larger creatures aswell.. A mammoth or a t-rex both have huge strength stats and are therefore incredibly athletics, because of the same issue of athletics not taking their body weight into account.
There is a certain room in which we can suspend our disbelief.. would an orc be heavier than an elf? probably.. But having them behave the same for mechanical reasons is within reason... But can we suspend our disbelief and act as if a cat or a rabbit weighs the same mechanically as an adult human? I certainly find it very strange and offputting.
I think we are all aware that 5e doesnt work in a way where weight makes athletics require more or less strength, and that is the problem. The thing is that the athletics system was set up to work just fine with player characters, but as soon as you need to apply the same rules creatures of sizes that are not common to players, we run into problems.
Except it isn't about just weight. Border collies and French Bulldogs have comparable weights on average, but in terms of athletics they differ like night and day. Cats are agile and great jumpers because they are predators who actively hunt prey. Turtles can't jump period, even though their weight isn't necessarily very different from a cat's - that because they don't hunt and their self-defense mechanism doesn't involve running away. Species develop the physiology they need to survive, and those needs can be entirely different regardless of weight.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Noone is saying that it's only about weight.. But your strength vs your weight is a usually a main indicator of your ability to lift your own body effectively, be in for jumps, climbing or something else. Then yea, there are some creatures that are built without the ability to jump for other more specific reasons, stubby legs.. stiff body ect. But that doesn't mean that the strength system works to begin with.
You are still not addressing the thing we are talking about here, which is that the way strength affects athletic abilities is infact preventing smaller creatures from being athletic, aswell as making huge creatures unbelievably athletic. I don't understand why you find it necessary to disregard this very real flaw the mechanics. It is clearly an issue.
Help me understand you here. Is your position that the way strength works makes mechanical sense for creatures that are significantly smaller or larger than a human? If it is, please give an actual reason why you think that, because so far you seem to be dodging the issue.
If your position that the system is indeed broken for creatures that are not roughly human sized, but that other factors also play into your athletic abilities.. then yea.. noone is disagreeing with you.
Strength is absolutely the right stat to associated with athletic activities, insofar as assigning it to one of D&D's Sacred Six go.
Why, then, are Small species/critters savagely penalized for their size and informed they can never be athletic in any way?
Please do not contact or message me.
Erm... Savagely penalized how? Can never be athletic in any way why?
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I understand real world strength and athletics at the highest levels. It's what I do professionally.
I'd offer that the best option would be to allow players to use EITHER Strength--Athletics OR Dexterity--Acrobatics.
Here's my simple take. There's no need to get more real world on it because I assure you, it is significantly more complicated than you think (strength, endurance, mobility, flexibility, grip endurance, pull strength, hang strength, lactic threshold, mental fatigue, nervous system issues, sleep, nutrition, durability, tendon/joint/ligament strength, absolute strength, raw strength, overall bodyweight, coordination, etc.)..ANYWAY
When I think Acrobat, I'd explain it to a 7yr old as, "the guys/gals that do stuff in Cirque Du Soleil." They are acrobatics. They primarily pull from gymnasts, climbers, bodyweight specialists (more street than olympic), contortionists, and of course, performers, circus experts, balance experts, etc. That's a broad view. So notice-
ACROBATS and CLIMBERS. There are elite climbers in Cirque. They are all acrobatic. Therefore, when it comes to climbing, it fits the bill because Cirque folk are among the most acrobatic on the planet and are made up of many disciplines, among them, high level climbers. The same could be said for Ninja Warrior folk.
Now, Athletics. Athletics, and its attachment to Strength in D&D means...IT'S STRENGTH. I've worked with, alongside, studied, and spent time with nearly elite level climbers. I'm not talking Adam Ondra or Alex Honnold, but better than 90% of the world's population. They are TREMENDOUSLY strong. Granted, they can't out backsquat or deadlift me but there's a VERY SMALL population of people on this earth that can out backsquat me while weighing what your average high level climber weighs. Point is, you have to define strength. What is strong? What movements indicate strength?
Again, as someone that lives and breathes this, an iron cross is strong, as is a 900lb Deadlift, as is a 1-arm muscle up. As is someone that can hang by their top digit on a ledge for 30 seconds. That's not acrobatic. That's STRENGTH. Tendon, ligament, and pure strength. Demonstrable. Therefore, Strength applies to climbing.
In long -
use both!
All things Lich - DM tips, tricks, and other creative shenanigans
High strength isn't necessarily the same as "roided out muscle-mountain" though. And a lot of those atheletic contests rely on more than just power to weight ratio. Running (as you say) will be affected by stride length, and swimming (in most situations an adventurer will be using it) will likely be competing against the srength of waves or current.
Plus, almost all other uses of STR in D&D will be "exerting physical effort against a fixed object in the world" rather than based on power/weight ratios.
So I think the best way to deal with this would be to stick with the principle that small and tiny creatures should (on average) have low(er) strength, but give them specific bonuses to skills and checks where small size, high strength/weigh ratios, or physiology would give a benefit to that specific activity. (E.g. Halfling Nimbleness could also give proficiency to Althletics checks for climbing). And if a creature has a climb speed (e.g. cats), then presumably it shouldn't be making climb checks for climbing anything that it should expect to be able to climb.
This Daniel Woods you're referring probably also has a strength score around 14ish and not around 8-10 that people tend to dump their dexterity characters to.
I would call this dude strong rather than dexterous if I had to pick one, but he's obviously both.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
Something that could be done, that might not break the 5e game design of simplicity, is to have two strength scores, one that is an absolute strength score and a strength score that is relative to creature size.
Whenever you'd do something that only affects yourself which requires strength, like climbing or jumping, you'd use the relative strength score.
Whenever you were to use your strength to affect something that's not your own body, you'd use your absolute strength score.
To not have this being a nerf to strength characters in general, we'd have to do something similar for other stats, or we'd have to weaken dexterity, perhaps by making it so dexterity doesn't count as the damage modifier for dexterity based weapons, but only counts for the attack modifier.
Also moving initiative to be based on intelligence or wisdom instead.
Perhaps we'd also do something along the lines of finding some more skills that can be based on strength instead of just the one we have so far. In general we could use some more love for athletic characters in general in the game design.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
I don't think that's worth the additional hassle.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Already exists, carrying capacity is modified by size. It's just that it isn't applied for Small vs Medium.
There is nothing stopping you from having a 5 foot tall, 50kg dwarf, human, elf, halfling, or gnome. The elf, human and dwarf would be medium while the halfling and gnome would be small. Nothing links the terminology to the chosen statistics. The tallest gnome would be larger than the shortest human. Really it should be set by a range something like under 5 foot equals small, 5 to 7 equals medium etc. Then if you make a balanced set of pros and cons it becomes a consideration when making your character. There has been a bit of talk about removing race as a consideration for stats, there should be massive variation within any population. Back ground and profession matter but race shouldn't.
Nor is it applied to instances where a character has to lift their own body such as jumping or climbing which is kinda the problem.
I wonder how many the people arguing that climbing is DEX-based actually ever tried climbing in their life, anyone who has will know that it’s very definitely STR-based, this a perfect example of Athletics check, Acrobatics might help you land in a way that avoids damage if you fall but it won’t get you up the wall. Strength relative to your body mass comes into play here too but even taking that into account it’s still a strength-based skill, I would just use the DC differences to accommodate the fact that it’s easier for a lighter character to scale the same wall than for a heavier one.
Cats are good at climbing because they have claws, that gives way more advantage than their strength or dexterity does, it’s a mechanical solution, not ability-based, if you give a human boots and gloves that imitate cat’s claws, they’d be able to scale a tree without major problems as well, arguing that cats are good are something doesn’t transfer to the discussion of humans being good at the same thing.
Was just about to say something similar, linking size to climbing while ignoring things like4 feet and claws doesn't set a good base for the argument. Wonder if OP's ever seen a bear climb a tree.. they are pretty big and really strong but having 4 feet and claws sure is an advantage they and cats share vs say a human
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vIwNyqIceE&ab_channel=kylerfletcher - lil vid for context
This thread is not about arguing for dex being using for climbing, so why are you even starting with that premise. The reason dex was brought up at all is because the disucssion surrounding dex vs strength for climbing comes from a similar place as this discussion, and that one might argue that dex is the best indicator of strength vs body weight... but it is not the topic of this thread. Strength is important for climbing, but it strength relative to your own weight, which is not reflected in how 5e handles strength, and that is the point of the thread. It is a fact that being larger makes it more difficult to lift your own weight and therefore requires more stength to compensate for that issue.
Cats are good at climbing because they have claws AND because their strength is rather large compared to their weight relative to humans. And I wasn't even using cats as my example for climbing, I was using them as my example for jumping. Also, this thread is not about humans either.. it is specifically about creatures that are smaller than medium like cats and squirrels, because the strength system is not set up to work for them.
Yes I've seen these videos before... what on earth makes you think I'm ignoring things like claws and having more feet? Obviously claws are an advantage when climbing, that is entirely irrelevant to the point I was making in the opening post of this thread.
I was specifically highlighting the problem that having the strength stat not reflect strength relative to weight and still have it determine how far you can jump or how easily you can climb is a major problem for creatures which are smaller than your average human in 5e... Yes, claws are great, this is why these creatures often have a climbspeed, you are trying to dismiss my point without actually addressing it at all.
Let me boil the problem down for both you;
A human with a strength 3 of will have difficulty lifting themselves and unable to jump far, because a strength of 3 is supposed to reflect a strength below the human average.
A cat with a strength of 3 should not have difficulty lifting itself and will have the ability to jump well, because a strength lower than the human average is still incredibly strong relative to the cat's weight.
In 5e, that is not the case, a cat and a human, both with a strength of 3 will have similar climbing rolls, and be be equally poor at jumping. Climbing can, with a forgiving DM, be compensated for by setting the DC low, but that is not the case with jumping.
The problem being addressed isn't whether strength is important to climbing or jumping, but that body mass makes a bigger difference than a flat measure of strength. The closest comparison I can make might look like:
I am 6 feet tall and 150 pounds and I can pick up a rock that weighs 150 pounds (and no more). My D&D Str is 8
My companion is 8 feet tall and 350 pounds and he can pick up a rock that weighs 150 pounds (and no more). His D&D Str is 8
When we go to climb a rope, or cliff or jump over a gap, I am willing to bet I can climb farther, faster and much easier than him and I bet I can jump farther than him, too.
The issue being addressed is that there really isn't a GOOD mechanic, using the stats as presented, to represent a lot of "athletics" type activities, specifically related to the size of the creature. Strength, as demonstrated above, is used for other more direct measures, and Dexterity ignores the strength requirements inherent to the tasks. It's one of those weird, grey areas that DM's need to (or maybe should) address on the cases it comes up.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
You and your companion are the same size for game purposes (Medium) even if he weighs twice as much as you do. If you were a 4'2" Str 12 halfling weighing 120 lbs and I was a 5' 3' Str 12 human weighing 100 lbs, I could probably outclimb you quite handily, though you'd still be Small and I'd still be Medium. There's been a whole train of thought in this thread (and others) over Size and stats, but it doesn't work that way.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I think a cat a perfectly fine example for jumping, they are known to be great jumpings and can jump higher than your average human... But feel free to replace it with a rabbit in your mind... The specific small animal is not the point xD... The point is that 5e does not handle strength well when it comes to lifting your own body for creatures that are significantly smaller than a human
And yea, a cat having to carry an external weight will function similar to a human.. again, not what we are talking about :)
This is specficially about the strength calculation for carrying your own body weight not working when we apply it to creatures that are not roughly human sized.
This is not just about player characters.. it's about any instance where the athletic abilities of smaller creatures come into play.. be in with familiars, a druid wild shaping.. anything really.
It's not even just smaller creatues, the system breaks for larger creatures aswell.. A mammoth or a t-rex both have huge strength stats and are therefore incredibly athletics, because of the same issue of athletics not taking their body weight into account.
There is a certain room in which we can suspend our disbelief.. would an orc be heavier than an elf? probably.. But having them behave the same for mechanical reasons is within reason... But can we suspend our disbelief and act as if a cat or a rabbit weighs the same mechanically as an adult human? I certainly find it very strange and offputting.
I think we are all aware that 5e doesnt work in a way where weight makes athletics require more or less strength, and that is the problem. The thing is that the athletics system was set up to work just fine with player characters, but as soon as you need to apply the same rules creatures of sizes that are not common to players, we run into problems.
Exactly! Thank you.
Except it isn't about just weight. Border collies and French Bulldogs have comparable weights on average, but in terms of athletics they differ like night and day. Cats are agile and great jumpers because they are predators who actively hunt prey. Turtles can't jump period, even though their weight isn't necessarily very different from a cat's - that because they don't hunt and their self-defense mechanism doesn't involve running away. Species develop the physiology they need to survive, and those needs can be entirely different regardless of weight.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Noone is saying that it's only about weight.. But your strength vs your weight is a usually a main indicator of your ability to lift your own body effectively, be in for jumps, climbing or something else. Then yea, there are some creatures that are built without the ability to jump for other more specific reasons, stubby legs.. stiff body ect. But that doesn't mean that the strength system works to begin with.
You are still not addressing the thing we are talking about here, which is that the way strength affects athletic abilities is infact preventing smaller creatures from being athletic, aswell as making huge creatures unbelievably athletic. I don't understand why you find it necessary to disregard this very real flaw the mechanics. It is clearly an issue.
Help me understand you here. Is your position that the way strength works makes mechanical sense for creatures that are significantly smaller or larger than a human? If it is, please give an actual reason why you think that, because so far you seem to be dodging the issue.
If your position that the system is indeed broken for creatures that are not roughly human sized, but that other factors also play into your athletic abilities.. then yea.. noone is disagreeing with you.