I'm sorry if this has been hashed over already but it came up in my game last night.
I have 2 high-Dex characters in my group and neither took Athletics during character creation because they figured climbing something would be an Acrobatics check. Not an unreasonable assumption IMHO. However, we now have a Tabaxi that can't climb because they have a Str of 10 and even WITH Athletics at their current level they'd only get a +2. For a race with a climbing speed BONUS this seems a bit lame to me.
I explained the difference between Athletics and Acrobatics as the difference between a cat leaping from the floor to the counter (which is accomplished more by muscle power than balance) versus walking a tightrope (which is definitely a balance thing). However I feel that Dexterity is OP in 5e and Str is under-used except by Barbarians and races with bonuses to lifting and carrying things.
Any suggestions on how to resolve this? I don't want to make Dex even more useful than it already is but the idea that the Str-based fighter with no skill is climbing better than a cat with Acrobatics just feels wrong.
Any creature with a climbing speed can climb without making climb checks except in unusual situations like trying to climb a perfectly smooth wall or climbing on a ceiling. That overrides the normal climbing rules for humans, etc..
What I did with my last character who has a high Dex and a low Str is I took Athletics. He’s not great at either, but he’s Ok at both which is better to me than being great at one and poor at the other one.
Any creature with a climbing speed can climb without making climb checks except in unusual situations like trying to climb a perfectly smooth wall or climbing on a ceiling. That overrides the normal climbing rules for humans, etc..
Any creature can climb (or swim, or jump) without any ability checks. The only thing a climbing speed does is let you climb faster. Athletics checks come into play when you attempt something difficult, like swimming in stormy waters or climbing a surface with very few hand and footholds; situations where being a skilled swimmer or climber matters.
As long as the Tabaxi characters don't attempt anything risky, they can use that climbing speed just fine. As the DM, you get to decide what's risky and what isn't and can say that their claws let the climb certain surfaces that human hands would struggle with.
The issue arose when the characters attempted to climb onto large boulders (like 15' high boulders) to gain better fields of view (both are shooters). Even though both were starting from the backs of horses to get a boost, the boulders were pretty smooth. Sure, anyone can climb a LADDER but I'm trying to resolve the fact that Dex-based characters seem to get all the perks EXCEPT for Athletics which is based on Strength. I can't see Dwayne Johnson climbing a rope faster than Bruce Lee.
By RAW Acrobatics doesn't help with climbing, Athletics does. That's pretty clear in the PHB, but:
a race with a natural climbing ability could easily be seen to have advantage on such checks (roughly equal to a +4 or +5 bonus I've read), and,
there's always the PHB Variant rule allowing different abilities for skills, so an dexterous tabaxi might use their agility to pivot and use momentum more than a strong PC might use brute force.
Or, you could rule that Acrobatics allows for "climbing" by parkour/ninja-type leaping *where* terrain suits, but Athletics is required for brute force efforts such as long climbs up heavy ropes.
I can't see Dwayne Johnson climbing a rope faster than Bruce Lee.
Not a fair comparison. Bruce Lee wasn't known for acrobatics. Jackie Chan is known for acrobatics. Dwayne Johnson and Jackie Chan probably have levels in Athletics AND Acrobatics.
Trying to figure out which skill to use isn't difficult. Just use the first thing that pops into your head when you think Athlete and Acrobat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
I can't see Dwayne Johnson climbing a rope faster than Bruce Lee.
Not a fair comparison. Bruce Lee wasn't known for acrobatics. Jackie Chan is known for acrobatics. Dwayne Johnson and Jackie Chan probably have levels in Athletics AND Acrobatics.
Trying to figure out which skill to use isn't difficult. Just use the first thing that pops into your head when you think Athlete and Acrobat.
Part of the problem (and this is a mechanics thing) is that in the real world it's impossible to develop the muscles that aid your balance WITHOUT building up the muscles that give you strength. I'm a massage therapist and I can tell you, yoga instructors and dancers are STRONG. In order to do this in D&D, you'd have to give a bonus to one stat for taking the other one, so having +4 Dex (if 10 is the base) would grant you +2 Str. However, this completely destroy the system as it stands.
By RAW Acrobatics doesn't help with climbing, Athletics does. That's pretty clear in the PHB, but:
a race with a natural climbing ability could easily be seen to have advantage on such checks (roughly equal to a +4 or +5 bonus I've read), and,
there's always the PHB Variant rule allowing different abilities for skills, so an dexterous tabaxi might use their agility to pivot and use momentum more than a strong PC might use brute force.
Or, you could rule that Acrobatics allows for "climbing" by parkour/ninja-type leaping *where* terrain suits, but Athletics is required for brute force efforts such as long climbs up heavy ropes.
This might be a good compromise. Thanks for the suggestion.
a race with a natural climbing ability could easily be seen to have advantage on such checks (roughly equal to a +4 or +5 bonus I've read), and,
Having claws is like putting on flippers - you can go faster, but that doesn't mean your technique is good. If you've decided a situation calls for an athletics check you're saying skill factors into it, and being a Tabaxi doesn't mean you're a good mountain climber. They have to practice to get good at it just like everyone else.
Or, you could rule that Acrobatics allows for "climbing" by parkour/ninja-type leaping *where* terrain suits, but Athletics is required for brute force efforts such as long climbs up heavy ropes.
The acrobatics skill is mainly about keeping your balance. You could allow a Dexterity (Athletics) check if you think the situation calls for speed more than strength but acrobatics doesn't make sense to me for parkour unless they're on a tightrope or unstable footing. The rules for jumping call for athletics when clearing obstacles and acrobatics to stay on your feet when you land.
a race with a natural climbing ability could easily be seen to have advantage on such checks (roughly equal to a +4 or +5 bonus I've read), and,
Having claws is like putting on flippers - you can go faster, but that doesn't mean your technique is good. If you've decided a situation calls for an athletics check you're saying skill factors into it, and being a Tabaxi doesn't mean you're a good mountain climber. They have to practice to get good at it just like everyone else.
Or, you could rule that Acrobatics allows for "climbing" by parkour/ninja-type leaping *where* terrain suits, but Athletics is required for brute force efforts such as long climbs up heavy ropes.
The acrobatics skill is mainly about keeping your balance. You could allow a Dexterity (Athletics) check if you think the situation calls for speed more than strength but acrobatics doesn't make sense to me for parkour unless they're on a tightrope or unstable footing. The rules for jumping call for athletics when clearing obstacles and acrobatics to stay on your feet when you land.
Each of us can rule as we feel best, but I must point out some of the parkour videos I've seen involve jumping and running off and along some very narrow steps and walls that must certainly demand a great sense of balance and coordination.
In order to do this in D&D, you'd have to give a bonus to one stat for taking the other one, so having +4 Dex (if 10 is the base) would grant you +2 Str. However, this completely destroy the system as it stands.
Or would it...?
Back in the day (and yeah, I guess I'm showing my age now), there used to be a stat called Comeliness (COM), representing how "pretty" you were, physically, and one of the few things it actually did was give you a bonus to your Charisma stat.
Or accept you can’t be good at everything. The rules makes distinctions so characters each have times they shine. Kind of abused if we keep giving the high Dex/Wis characters all the joy isn’t it?
Or accept you can’t be good at everything. The rules makes distinctions so characters each have times they shine. Kind of abused if we keep giving the high Dex/Wis characters all the joy isn’t it?
To be honest, I was considering trying to give each class their own Initiative bonus based on their primary stat so Wizards would use Int, Str-based characters would use St etc.
This is an issue with categorised skills as D&D uses them. Skills in the real-world are by their nature a collection of the D&D stats to power them. Climbing for example needs good strength, dexterity, constitution and some knowledge of what you are doing depending on the surface you are climbing (a tree or ladder not much knowledge, cliffs and sheer walls much more).
Personally for most skills I let the players description of how their character does a task to determine the skill/ability combination, the default (or most common) is just what is given in the rules. For climbing most characters would use Athletics, but pending on the description they could use a variety of ability modifiers for that; strength (raw muscle/default), dexterity (more fluid swings and leaps), intelligence (precise knowledge and implementation of techniques), constitution (endurance for longer, or less rushed climbs), even wisdom (for finding the best hand/foot holds), while charisma would be about the only one not really useful (short of maybe convincing someone to do the climb for you).
A character with 10 strength and no skill in Athletics would be as good at climbing as the average villager. If you want to be better then put more points in Strenght or pick Athletics as a skill. Simple. If you use Point Buy then you get the opportunity to choose what you are good at and whether you suck at something. You make your choices and deal with the consequences. That is what makes the game interesting; you have to rely on your teammates to cover your shortcomings, or find another way to achieve your objective using the skills and equipment you have at hand.
I would be reluctant to allow a player that dumped strength and took another skill instead of athletic to avoid the consequences. They chose to be a weak un-athletic character, that is their limitation. I don’t mean punish them but play it fair. They still have a chance to climb a DC15 boulder but they may have to make several attempts while the beefier character can do it with ease. But that beefy character will have their own limitations in other areas.
Personally I always choose either Athletics or Acrobatics during character creation. Not because they are interchangeable, but because without either you are going to need lots of help overcoming physical obstacles.
Agreed, I had a character once whose dump stat was strength and he couldn't even jump over a normal 10' pit in a corridor. Using a rope to cross it was also a failure. But he was good at other things.
Or accept you can’t be good at everything. The rules makes distinctions so characters each have times they shine. Kind of abused if we keep giving the high Dex/Wis characters all the joy isn’t it?
To be honest, I was considering trying to give each class their own Initiative bonus based on their primary stat so Wizards would use Int, Str-based characters would use St etc.
There's already class features for that (see War Magic for wizards, Swashbuckler for Rogues, Gloom Stalker for Rangers.)
This ties back Stone_Goliath said: let people be good at the things they're supposed to be good at. Agile characters are supposed to be fast to react in combat. If someone wants to start with high initiative they can boost their DEX, pick a subclass that grants bonuses to initiative or take the Alert feat.
Or accept you can’t be good at everything. The rules makes distinctions so characters each have times they shine. Kind of abused if we keep giving the high Dex/Wis characters all the joy isn’t it?
To be honest, I was considering trying to give each class their own Initiative bonus based on their primary stat so Wizards would use Int, Str-based characters would use St etc.
There's already class features for that (see War Magic for wizards, Swashbuckler for Rogues, Gloom Stalker for Rangers.)
This ties back Stone_Goliath said: let people be good at the things they're supposed to be good at. Agile characters are supposed to be fast to react in combat. If someone wants to start with high initiative they can boost their DEX, pick a subclass that grants bonuses to initiative or take the Alert feat.
So the high-Dex Rogue pays the same points for a 15 Dex that the Wizard pays for their 15 Int, both get a +2 stat bump from their race. Now the Rogue enjoys +3 AC, +3 to Initiative, +3 to hit with missiles and finesse weapons, +3 to DAMAGE with missiles and finesse weapons. The Wizard gets bonuses to their spellcasting but no Initiative bonus, no AC bonus etc.
I'm TRYING to let characters be good at what they're good at but when the system clearly favors Dex over every other stat, I see that as a problem.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm sorry if this has been hashed over already but it came up in my game last night.
I have 2 high-Dex characters in my group and neither took Athletics during character creation because they figured climbing something would be an Acrobatics check. Not an unreasonable assumption IMHO. However, we now have a Tabaxi that can't climb because they have a Str of 10 and even WITH Athletics at their current level they'd only get a +2. For a race with a climbing speed BONUS this seems a bit lame to me.
I explained the difference between Athletics and Acrobatics as the difference between a cat leaping from the floor to the counter (which is accomplished more by muscle power than balance) versus walking a tightrope (which is definitely a balance thing). However I feel that Dexterity is OP in 5e and Str is under-used except by Barbarians and races with bonuses to lifting and carrying things.
Any suggestions on how to resolve this? I don't want to make Dex even more useful than it already is but the idea that the Str-based fighter with no skill is climbing better than a cat with Acrobatics just feels wrong.
Any creature with a climbing speed can climb without making climb checks except in unusual situations like trying to climb a perfectly smooth wall or climbing on a ceiling. That overrides the normal climbing rules for humans, etc..
What I did with my last character who has a high Dex and a low Str is I took Athletics. He’s not great at either, but he’s Ok at both which is better to me than being great at one and poor at the other one.
Professional computer geek
Any creature can climb (or swim, or jump) without any ability checks. The only thing a climbing speed does is let you climb faster. Athletics checks come into play when you attempt something difficult, like swimming in stormy waters or climbing a surface with very few hand and footholds; situations where being a skilled swimmer or climber matters.
As long as the Tabaxi characters don't attempt anything risky, they can use that climbing speed just fine. As the DM, you get to decide what's risky and what isn't and can say that their claws let the climb certain surfaces that human hands would struggle with.
The issue arose when the characters attempted to climb onto large boulders (like 15' high boulders) to gain better fields of view (both are shooters). Even though both were starting from the backs of horses to get a boost, the boulders were pretty smooth. Sure, anyone can climb a LADDER but I'm trying to resolve the fact that Dex-based characters seem to get all the perks EXCEPT for Athletics which is based on Strength. I can't see Dwayne Johnson climbing a rope faster than Bruce Lee.
By RAW Acrobatics doesn't help with climbing, Athletics does. That's pretty clear in the PHB, but:
a race with a natural climbing ability could easily be seen to have advantage on such checks (roughly equal to a +4 or +5 bonus I've read), and,
there's always the PHB Variant rule allowing different abilities for skills, so an dexterous tabaxi might use their agility to pivot and use momentum more than a strong PC might use brute force.
Or, you could rule that Acrobatics allows for "climbing" by parkour/ninja-type leaping *where* terrain suits, but Athletics is required for brute force efforts such as long climbs up heavy ropes.
Not a fair comparison. Bruce Lee wasn't known for acrobatics. Jackie Chan is known for acrobatics. Dwayne Johnson and Jackie Chan probably have levels in Athletics AND Acrobatics.
Trying to figure out which skill to use isn't difficult. Just use the first thing that pops into your head when you think Athlete and Acrobat.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Part of the problem (and this is a mechanics thing) is that in the real world it's impossible to develop the muscles that aid your balance WITHOUT building up the muscles that give you strength. I'm a massage therapist and I can tell you, yoga instructors and dancers are STRONG. In order to do this in D&D, you'd have to give a bonus to one stat for taking the other one, so having +4 Dex (if 10 is the base) would grant you +2 Str. However, this completely destroy the system as it stands.
Or would it...?
This might be a good compromise. Thanks for the suggestion.
Having claws is like putting on flippers - you can go faster, but that doesn't mean your technique is good. If you've decided a situation calls for an athletics check you're saying skill factors into it, and being a Tabaxi doesn't mean you're a good mountain climber. They have to practice to get good at it just like everyone else.
The acrobatics skill is mainly about keeping your balance. You could allow a Dexterity (Athletics) check if you think the situation calls for speed more than strength but acrobatics doesn't make sense to me for parkour unless they're on a tightrope or unstable footing. The rules for jumping call for athletics when clearing obstacles and acrobatics to stay on your feet when you land.
Each of us can rule as we feel best, but I must point out some of the parkour videos I've seen involve jumping and running off and along some very narrow steps and walls that must certainly demand a great sense of balance and coordination.
(edited grammar)
Back in the day (and yeah, I guess I'm showing my age now), there used to be a stat called Comeliness (COM), representing how "pretty" you were, physically, and one of the few things it actually did was give you a bonus to your Charisma stat.
Or accept you can’t be good at everything. The rules makes distinctions so characters each have times they shine. Kind of abused if we keep giving the high Dex/Wis characters all the joy isn’t it?
To be honest, I was considering trying to give each class their own Initiative bonus based on their primary stat so Wizards would use Int, Str-based characters would use St etc.
This is an issue with categorised skills as D&D uses them. Skills in the real-world are by their nature a collection of the D&D stats to power them. Climbing for example needs good strength, dexterity, constitution and some knowledge of what you are doing depending on the surface you are climbing (a tree or ladder not much knowledge, cliffs and sheer walls much more).
Personally for most skills I let the players description of how their character does a task to determine the skill/ability combination, the default (or most common) is just what is given in the rules. For climbing most characters would use Athletics, but pending on the description they could use a variety of ability modifiers for that; strength (raw muscle/default), dexterity (more fluid swings and leaps), intelligence (precise knowledge and implementation of techniques), constitution (endurance for longer, or less rushed climbs), even wisdom (for finding the best hand/foot holds), while charisma would be about the only one not really useful (short of maybe convincing someone to do the climb for you).
- Loswaith
A character with 10 strength and no skill in Athletics would be as good at climbing as the average villager. If you want to be better then put more points in Strenght or pick Athletics as a skill. Simple. If you use Point Buy then you get the opportunity to choose what you are good at and whether you suck at something. You make your choices and deal with the consequences. That is what makes the game interesting; you have to rely on your teammates to cover your shortcomings, or find another way to achieve your objective using the skills and equipment you have at hand.
I would be reluctant to allow a player that dumped strength and took another skill instead of athletic to avoid the consequences. They chose to be a weak un-athletic character, that is their limitation. I don’t mean punish them but play it fair. They still have a chance to climb a DC15 boulder but they may have to make several attempts while the beefier character can do it with ease. But that beefy character will have their own limitations in other areas.
Personally I always choose either Athletics or Acrobatics during character creation. Not because they are interchangeable, but because without either you are going to need lots of help overcoming physical obstacles.
Agreed, I had a character once whose dump stat was strength and he couldn't even jump over a normal 10' pit in a corridor. Using a rope to cross it was also a failure. But he was good at other things.
Professional computer geek
There's already class features for that (see War Magic for wizards, Swashbuckler for Rogues, Gloom Stalker for Rangers.)
This ties back Stone_Goliath said: let people be good at the things they're supposed to be good at. Agile characters are supposed to be fast to react in combat. If someone wants to start with high initiative they can boost their DEX, pick a subclass that grants bonuses to initiative or take the Alert feat.
So the high-Dex Rogue pays the same points for a 15 Dex that the Wizard pays for their 15 Int, both get a +2 stat bump from their race. Now the Rogue enjoys +3 AC, +3 to Initiative, +3 to hit with missiles and finesse weapons, +3 to DAMAGE with missiles and finesse weapons. The Wizard gets bonuses to their spellcasting but no Initiative bonus, no AC bonus etc.
I'm TRYING to let characters be good at what they're good at but when the system clearly favors Dex over every other stat, I see that as a problem.