Starting at 7th level, you can add half your proficiency bonus (round up) to any Strength, Dexterity, or Constitution check you make that doesn’t already use your proficiency bonus.
In addition, when you make a running long jump, the distance you can cover increases by a number of feet equal to your Strength modifier.
Does the last line of Remarkable Athlete mean my jump distance would decrease by 1 foot if my strength score is 8?
The lack of a "minimum of 1" is the part that has me puzzled, because honestly, you can increase a number by a negative number writing something like 8 + -1 is a valid statement. In the text's defense, you don't usually increase by a negative number, but technically speaking you can.
Well 8 + -1 is mathematics and is identical to saying 8 - 1. They specifically use the word increases which is fairly innocuous in and of itself - I think all abilities like that say increases - but by the definition of the word it means to "become or make greater in size, amount, or degree". Taking 1 away does the opposite. *shrug*
I mean - with the absence of a "minimum of 1" I'm just totally nitpicking because it does seem really bizarre to become worse by getting better.
Well this whole game is mathematics to some point or another, I've always just mentally changed the text into an equation because that's just how my mind works. As I said, I don't think this feature was intended to decrease your jumping distance, but due to their attention to include a minimum of 1 everywhere else something might decrease (even though it says increase), it seems odd it was left out here.
Probably an oversight on their part; it's definitely nonsensical to apply literally ("Your character is getting older and now has arthritis!"). Without the additional text for determining the minimum, at best the text results in an indeterminable change. Is the minimum 1 or a fraction or what? (Insert RAI)
But even with that said, I'm with you, mouse0270: an "increase" can absolutely be negative depending on how its handled. Ask any accountant; it's certainly not intuitive, but it's legitimate.
I can provide an in-game example of another place where you add your CON modifier and can end up with a lower number, but I won't because it's silly and ridiculous and your jump distance isn't supposed to decrease :p
The lack of a "minimum of 1" is the part that has me puzzled, because honestly, you can increase a number by a negative number writing something like 8 + -1 is a valid statement. In the text's defense, you don't usually increase by a negative number, but technically speaking you can.
No, by definition an increase requires that you end up with more than you started. That's different from addition as soon as you start talking about non-positive numbers. "Increase by -1" makes as much sense as division by 0.
The lack of a "minimum of 1" is the part that has me puzzled, because honestly, you can increase a number by a negative number writing something like 8 + -1 is a valid statement. In the text's defense, you don't usually increase by a negative number, but technically speaking you can.
No, by definition an increase requires that you end up with more than you started. That's different from addition as soon as you start talking about non-positive numbers. "Increase by -1" makes as much sense as division by 0.
Unless you're describing a credit account, in which case it makes perfect sense!
I think what you're saying is a fair interpretation, don't get me wrong! But mouse isn't wrong either; "increase" can very reasonably be interpreted as "add", and then followed by the variable Strength modifier, you can end up with a net loss by following the RAW.
I think y'all are missing one key word in the description that makes this all moot: "CAN". It says you CAN increase it by X amount, but you don't have to if it were to be lower like from an 8 in Strength.
I think y'all are missing one key word in the description that makes this all moot: "CAN". It says you CAN increase it by X amount, but you don't have to if it were to be lower like from an 8 in Strength.
No it doesn't. It says that "the distance you can cover increases by a number of feat equal to your strength modifier."
I'm in team "an increase can't be negative," because a) that's the common English meaning of the word, and b) I can find no other example of an increase that has the ability to be negative which would create a rule contrary to the plain meaning of the word. When you modify your damage with a negative Str or Dex modifier, you are "adding" the modifier to the dice roll, not "increasing" the dice roll by the modifier.
Does the last line of Remarkable Athlete mean my jump distance would decrease by 1 foot if my strength score is 8?
haha, yeah I guess so.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I can't think of any way around it off the top of my head. That's hilarious!
They often add something like “minimum +1”. They didn’t here. They probably thought no one with less than 12 strength would ever take this feat.
Remarkable Athlete says your jump distance increases. By definition, it can't decrease or stay the same. In practice that means it has a minimum of 1.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
It says it increases by your strength score modifier which would be -1
As to everyone else I wasn't looking at it from the feat but as apart of the champion archetype of the fighter.
I agree with InquisitiveCoder. It can't increase if the modifier is 0 or less. It would either remain unchanged or decrease.
It is unusual to not see a "minimum of 1" though.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
The lack of a "minimum of 1" is the part that has me puzzled, because honestly, you can increase a number by a negative number writing something like 8 + -1 is a valid statement. In the text's defense, you don't usually increase by a negative number, but technically speaking you can.
Well 8 + -1 is mathematics and is identical to saying 8 - 1. They specifically use the word increases which is fairly innocuous in and of itself - I think all abilities like that say increases - but by the definition of the word it means to "become or make greater in size, amount, or degree". Taking 1 away does the opposite. *shrug*
I mean - with the absence of a "minimum of 1" I'm just totally nitpicking because it does seem really bizarre to become worse by getting better.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
Well this whole game is mathematics to some point or another, I've always just mentally changed the text into an equation because that's just how my mind works. As I said, I don't think this feature was intended to decrease your jumping distance, but due to their attention to include a minimum of 1 everywhere else something might decrease (even though it says increase), it seems odd it was left out here.
Probably an oversight on their part; it's definitely nonsensical to apply literally ("Your character is getting older and now has arthritis!"). Without the additional text for determining the minimum, at best the text results in an indeterminable change. Is the minimum 1 or a fraction or what? (Insert RAI)
But even with that said, I'm with you, mouse0270: an "increase" can absolutely be negative depending on how its handled. Ask any accountant; it's certainly not intuitive, but it's legitimate.
I can provide an in-game example of another place where you add your CON modifier and can end up with a lower number, but I won't because it's silly and ridiculous and your jump distance isn't supposed to decrease :p
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I agree with you, its probably not RAI but it is RAW.
No, by definition an increase requires that you end up with more than you started. That's different from addition as soon as you start talking about non-positive numbers. "Increase by -1" makes as much sense as division by 0.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I'm sure I've read that an increase cannot be negative in D&D. I think it was a sage advise.
Unless you're describing a credit account, in which case it makes perfect sense!
I think what you're saying is a fair interpretation, don't get me wrong! But mouse isn't wrong either; "increase" can very reasonably be interpreted as "add", and then followed by the variable Strength modifier, you can end up with a net loss by following the RAW.
I've been hunting for this exact thing; I could've sworn it was there, but I can't find it. Anyone else have any luck?
I'm sure I've read than an increase cannot be a negative anywhere. I think it was in a dictionary.
I know English can be a messed-up language sometimes, but other times, it really is that simple. 'Increase' means 'number go up'.
And it is going up! By -1. So down. Eh, I say it goes down, but you’re free to rule otherwise.
Extended Signature! Yay! https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/off-topic/adohands-kitchen/3153-extended-signature-thread?page=2#c21
Haven’t used this account in forever. Still a big fan of crawling claws.
I think y'all are missing one key word in the description that makes this all moot: "CAN". It says you CAN increase it by X amount, but you don't have to if it were to be lower like from an 8 in Strength.
No it doesn't. It says that "the distance you can cover increases by a number of feat equal to your strength modifier."
I'm in team "an increase can't be negative," because a) that's the common English meaning of the word, and b) I can find no other example of an increase that has the ability to be negative which would create a rule contrary to the plain meaning of the word. When you modify your damage with a negative Str or Dex modifier, you are "adding" the modifier to the dice roll, not "increasing" the dice roll by the modifier.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.