Post/Author/DateTime	Post
DrakeLeonclaw 04-12-08, 07:21 AM	So, I need the forum's opinion on this. I could have SWORN I read this somewhere but maybe i'm just imaging things. Say you have like, 18 ranks in a skill. Some DMs i've played with just let people take 10 on skills like that since they're already so high, but that didn't make sense to me, because probability would suggest that even the pro ball player strikes out sometimes. So I thought i read somewhere that you'd have to at least roll a 2 to succeed with a skill like that, because a 1 would constitute an automatic failure. Do the forums think so? Would rolling a one on a skill you have godly ranks in still constitute an unlucky break and you fail it? Likewise, what about a natural 20? If you had very little ranks in something, so little that you'd never be able to reach a certain DC with the highest die roll, would a natural 20 permit automatic success? I don't think so, but then again, i want some second opinions. Thanks!
dawnbringer 04-12-08, 07:47 AM	No. The rules say that rolling a 1 or a 20 on a skill check is NEVER an automatic success or automatic failure. Of course, rolling a 1 means your more likely to fail the check, but it isn't automatic.
Merestil Haye 04-12-08, 07:49 AM	There is no rule that says rolling a natural 1 on a skill check or ability check is an automatic failure, or that a natural 20 is an automatic success. If your modifiers are high enough that you succeed on a 1, you cannot fail. If they are so low that you cannot succeed on a 20, then you always fail. There is such a rule for attack rolls and saving throws but it does not and never has applied to skill checks. "Taking 10" isn't something which characters with lots of ranks can do, but untrained characters can't. Taking 10 means to perform a careful, workmanlike job and get an average result, and can be done by anyone at any time provided that they are not in combat or distracted by circumstances or the environment. (Or you are trying to use the UMD skill, which forbids taking 10 altogether).
DrakeLeonclaw 04-12-08, 08:36 AM	There is such a rule for attack rolls and saving throws but it does not and never has applied to skill checks. Ah, maybe THAT'S what I remember reading. That makes sense, so a natural 1 IS an automatic failure for an attack roll or a saving throw. Conversely, would a natural 20 be an automatic hit or save? if so, would a 20 then constitute a crit? Unlikely
BugHunter 04-12-08, 10:42 AM	Ah, maybe THAT'S what I remember reading. That makes sense, so a natural 1 IS an automatic failure for an attack roll or a saving throw. Conversely, would a natural 20 be an automatic hit or save? if so, would a 20 then constitute a crit? Unlikely The natural 20 on an attack roll only gives you a chance to do a crit. You will still need to roll a second d20 to confirm that you did a crit.
DrakeLeonclaw 04-12-08, 11:08 AM	The natural 20 on an attack roll only gives you a chance to do a crit. You will still need to roll a second d20 to confirm that you did a crit. Right, I know you'd still need to confirm it, and I suppose that in order to confirm a crit against such a creature, you would need to roll another natural 20 to confirm, right? I play with the insta-death variant rule, too, so then a 3rd natural 20 would constitute instant death I guess.
Tek_Jensen 04-12-08, 11:38 AM	No, you only need to hit the enemy's AC to confirm a crit ...
DrakeLeonclaw 04-12-08, 11:48 AM	No, you only need to hit the enemy's AC to confirm a crit ... Right, but we're talking about a creature with an AC so high compared to your attack that a roll of a d20 wouldn't hit it anyway, unless you rolled a 20 which means automatic hit, regardless of AC.
StevenO 04-12-08, 02:02 PM	As noted natural 1s and 20s only worry about Saves and Attacks. If they worked on skill checks then 1 in 20 people could successfully jump across the Grand Canyon just because they got lucky. The Baseball hitting example is highly flawed. As a skill check hitting a baseball would at best be an opposed roll vs. a pitcher who likely has a similiar skill modifier. If both sides were "taking 10" then it is possible that every pitch could be a hit or miss but most likely at least one party realizes who has the advantage and thus starts taking rolls to avoid the most likely outcome. More likely the batter could be considered as making an attack roll against an AC set by the pitcher. As for fielding that would most likely be a skill check modified by how the offense performs. IF you attack a creature that has an AC you normally can't hit then a 20 still lands. As that should be a threat you'd take a confirmation swing which would need a second 20 to hit unless you have something that helps confirmation. I strongly recommend against the "Instant Kill" scenario; it just ruins things as something goes down that shouldn't but you could consider increasing the critical multiplier with each additional natural 20.
Jaxgaret 04-12-08, 03:42 PM	There's an alternate rule for rolling 1s and 20s that converts all 1 rolls into -10s, and all 20 rolls into 30s. There is no automatic success or failure using such a system.
elonin 04-13-08, 09:44 AM	This isn't RAW but alot of DM's that i've run across use auto success on 20 and fail on 1's for skill checks.
zeratulcraft 04-13-08, 09:57 AM	Heh...just try 20 times to jump to the next continent!
Jaxgaret 04-13-08, 02:26 PM	Heh...just try 20 times to jump to the next continent! :)
Essex 04-13-08, 02:52 PM	Heh...just try 20 times to jump to the next continent! Do you have any idea how long that would take? Even while in mid-leap, you're still limited by your speed. You'd starve to death before hitting the ground. :P
zeratulcraft 04-13-08, 09:05 PM	Do you have any idea how long that would take? Even while in mid-leap, you're still limited by your speed. You'd starve to death before hitting the ground. :P Ring of Sustenance ;)
narack 04-14-08, 07:25 AM	You guys are wicked. If you can afford the ring you can afford a boat passage for 1/100th of the price, although it not as cool as leaping over the sea :P. For the skill there is not automatic success either fumbles. It's like school grade. They put you a level to obtain i.e. 60% (this is the DC) and if you get more your fine, if you get lower you still did the work but not enough which leads to consequence. Like a Skills. if you have to jump over a pit and miss the jump you did actually jump but not far enough. The best example i can give is what one of my player did in one of my campaign, there was a long path of pillar (5'X5') each 5' from each other. He tried to jump 2 pillar at the time to save time because he didn't like being chase by dozens of ogres. he the DC was something like 20-25. he miss it with a 1. but with that 1 it says that he was able to travel 10' which leads exactly to the first pillar. Even if he miss the target of the DC he still jumped so you just follow the rule of the skill according to the roll. Like Open lock can broke the lock if you miss by too much, obviously a open lock check is often make by people with 100000 rank in that skill so even on a 1 he get the DC (most of the time).
elonin 04-14-08, 12:25 PM	My earlier comment is that alot of dm's that I've run into have a auto success or failure with rolling 1's and 20's.
Shadowhowler 04-14-08, 01:23 PM	I've played under one DM that used the '1's count as -10 and 20's count as +30' on skill checks. I personaly just prefer to use skill checks as is. A 1 or a 20 dosn't mean anything special, aside from thats what you add to your modified skill total to see what your check result is. I am a big fan of taking 10 or taking 20... and do it as often as time and situations permet in game. I often run into players and DM's who are confused by it. 'Ok... so you found all the loot and put it into a pile... roll your Apraise check.' 'I take my time looking over all the loot that night while we camp and take 20.' 'Uh, you do what?' 'You know, take 20? Take a much longer time for a more correct result?' 'Uh... ok... make your roll.' 'You DON'T roll, thats the point.' 'What?!?' You'd be surprised how many players and DM's out there don't even know about taking 10 or 20, and can't fathom a situation where you don't actualy ROLL DICE to figure something out. :rolleyes:
sblaxman 04-14-08, 09:34 PM	Hehe, taking 20 is a pretty simple idea, not sure how they got confused. You sat there and looked over the goods till you were sure. Easiest way I found to explain it is "I roll a 1, then a 2, then a 3, till I roll a 20"... In any situation where a 1 can't hurt you, then you can take 20 (given the time). Take 10 can be done if you are doing a repeated or mundane task, but you can have any skill at it, you can take 10 if you have 1 rank just as easily as if you have 18 ranks in a skill. Examples would be climbing or swimming (out of combat) where you can take your time. You can't take 20 (since a 1 might kill you) but you can take 10 to make things go faster.
Jaxgaret 04-14-08, 10:52 PM	My earlier comment is that alot of dm's that I've run into have a auto success or failure with rolling 1's and 20's. Yes, we understood that. Zeratulcraft's point was that if you attempt to Jump to the next continent, once out of every 20 times you will auto succeed. Think about what that means for a moment.
Jaxgaret 04-14-08, 10:56 PM	I've played under one DM that used the '1's count as -10 and 20's count as +30' on skill checks. I personaly just prefer to use skill checks as is. A 1 or a 20 dosn't mean anything special, aside from thats what you add to your modified skill total to see what your check result is. Was there anything specific about the -10/+30 system that you disliked? It seems like it would just allow for more variance; IMO sometimes it seems like 1-20 just isn't enough swing to make a skill check exciting. I haven't actually tried it, though. Maybe -5/+25 would work better? I am a big fan of taking 10 or taking 20... and do it as often as time and situations permet in game. Me too. It's a fantastic rule.
Shadowhowler 04-15-08, 11:07 AM	Was there anything specific about the -10/+30 system that you disliked? It seems like it would just allow for more variance; IMO sometimes it seems like 1-20 just isn't enough swing to make a skill check exciting. I haven't actually tried it, though. In my opinion, D&D already has to much variance. I'd like my skill checks to be a bit more relaible, I'd like to have a generaly better idea as to how well I can do things. The range on a D20 roll sometimes just seems like too much for me. The idea that a Hill Giant, with a 25 Str (+7) Who is squishing a Dog with a Str of 13 (+1) and is smaller then the Giant (+4 for gaint)... the Gaint is squishing the little dog and rolls a 4, and the Dog rolls a 16, and the dog powers out of the Gaints grasp, throwing him off. Or I make a Knowledge Nature Check for something really obscure, like a half-breed fey creature, by rolling an 18, but then I can't tell if a critter is a skunk or a Baddger cuz I roll a 3. I know games require a system of variance... I just feel for the most part the d20 is to much variance. I like Cyberpunk which uses a d10 (1/2 the variance) or White Wolf that uses Dice pools, which tend to be more uniform in result. This is why I LOVE Taking 20 or taking 10 when I can... the randomness of dice rolling is really NOT the part of playing RPG's that I love.
ToastedAmphibian 04-15-08, 05:05 PM	Wait, people roll HIGHER than 10? Wow, mabey someday ill roll an 18 on something too! Oh, and youd die jumping from one continent to the other, even with a ring of sustenance. You go up 1/4th the distance that you long jump..... So you need a ring of featherfall or something also.
narack 04-16-08, 12:21 PM	Wait, people roll HIGHER than 10? Wow, mabey someday ill roll an 18 on something too! Oh, and youd die jumping from one continent to the other, even with a ring of sustenance. You go up 1/4th the distance that you long jump..... So you need a ring of featherfall or something also. don't need feather fall, you doing horizontal jump so you jump X kilometers horizontally but 5' vertically. you need at least 15' to receive damage.
Neutronium_Dragon 04-16-08, 08:30 PM	> Was there anything specific about the -10/+30 system that you disliked? There's one thing which bugs me about it: 1 turning into -10 is a drop of 11 points. 20 turning into 30 is an increase of 10 points. I don't like the inequality. Either 1 ought to be -9 or 20 ought to be 31.
Zog_Jakome 04-16-08, 08:54 PM	I stopped reading about halfway through... any jump made with a jump check has no chance of taking damage as long as they have ranks in it. but that is not the point about letting natural 20s succeed automatically for skills. try jumping across the length of a football field 1000 times, 1 million times, did you succeed? NO. now trying rolling a natural 20 on a D20 1000 times, 1 million times did you succeed, yes. No one has luck like that where if they were to roll a d20 1000 times and not get a natural 20 at least once. the point is not about the consequences of a failed check, it's about the possibility of someone jumping that far. and that is not all jump is not the only skill that is creepy, look at some DCs in the epic level handbook. try reading the surface thoughts of your friend for 1 week straight, if natural 20's always succeed, then a sense motive check would accomplish this.
Nathreet 04-16-08, 09:17 PM	Ring of Sustenance ;) lol Also the epic uses: It's a DC 120 balance check to balance on a cloud It's a DC 120 escape artist check to slip through a wall of force (blocked? Gimme 2 minutes...) It's a DC 80 escape artists check to slip through a 2" wide chimney Make a DC 150 perform check to make your enemies fanatically devoted to you (orc army? Gimme 2 minutes...) It's a DC 80 sleight of hand check to make a nearby halfling "disappear"
ToastedAmphibian 04-16-08, 10:52 PM	don't need feather fall, you doing horizontal jump so you jump X kilometers horizontally but 5' vertically. you need at least 15' to receive damage. I stopped reading about halfway through... any jump made with a jump check has no chance of taking damage as long as they have ranks in it. but that is not the point about letting natural 20s succeed automatically for skills. What in the world are you people talking about? Long Jump A long jump is a horizontal jump, made across a gap like a chasm or stream. At the midpoint of the jump, you attain a vertical height equal to one-quarter of the horizontal distance. The DC for the jump is equal to the distance jumped (in feet). If you jump x kilometers, you go up x/4 kilometers. You also come down x/4 kilometers. For most values of x, this is a bad thing...... If you have ranks in Jump and you succeed on a Jump check, you land on your feet (when appropriate This is the only spot where it mentions a diffrence between trained and untrained jump checks. If a person with no ranks jumps off a moutain side, he will land on his arse before he dies. If he had one rank, he lands on his feet before he dies. Jumping only reduces the damage from falling by 10ft worth. It dosnt make you immune to the damaging effects of gravity.
nightwyrm 04-17-08, 03:13 AM	It's a DC 80 escape artists check to slip through a 2" wide chimney Ahh...this reminds me of a discussion in a certain board that would not be mentioned of the possibility of using this as a means of crawling inside another person....fun times....
Zog_Jakome 04-17-08, 03:27 AM	nowhere in the jump skill description does it say "if you jump too high you might take falling damage" in fact for the jumping up or across part it doesn't say anything about taking falling damage because you are not falling you are jumping. consider it like a matrix leap they get a +10,000 insight bonus on their jump checks they never take any falling damage. neo can take a 20 on jump and balance checks(if 20's always pass). so lets say he did fall several kilometers the tumble DC for ignoring falling damage is only 100, I rolled a natural 20... I pass. and the part about reducing damage by 10 feet is only for jumping down not up. I take a 20 on my jump check to jump to mars, I am going to get it one of these times. the point is not that you would sufficate and freeze before you get there the point is it is not possible. and a falling character doesn't die they take 20d6 points of damage easily survivable by a 10th level fighter with a good constitution.
ToastedAmphibian 04-17-08, 04:42 PM	nowhere in the jump skill description does it say "if you jump too high you might take falling damage" And nowhere in the jump skill does it say "A sucessfull jump check superceeds gravity" and the part about reducing damage by 10 feet is only for jumping down not up. Fine, i want to get to the bottom of a 100ft clif, so why "Jump down" and take fall damage. Acording to your rules i can long jump 5ft and land at the bottom of the cliff unharmed. so lets say he did fall several kilometers the tumble DC for ignoring falling damage is only 100, I rolled a natural 20... I pass Odds of 1 nat 20? 1/20. Jumping you can retry indefinetly if you cant possibly jump far enough without a nat 20 to endanger yourself. You only get one chance at the tumble check, and thus yoru odds arnt good. I take a 20 on my jump check to jump to mars, I am going to get it one of these times. Well, you cant actually take 20.... if you only get a 5000000 instead of a 1000000000 check result, it could be catastrophic! You have to roll till you get the actual 20..... the point is not that you would sufficate and freeze before you get there Your point possibly, not really MY point, or many other peoples points. the point is it is not possible. Exactly, because a 20 isnt an auto sucess on a skill check. However, we where discussing what the implications would be if such a rule did, in fact, exist. Please try to keep up. and a falling character doesn't die they take 20d6 points of damage easily survivable by a 10th level fighter with a good constitution. You are quite correct. This one is my fault, my example was concerning first level charactares, but i somehow forgot to include that in my post. sorry for any confusion my accidental ommission may have caused. However, acording to you, neither of them take ANY damage because they didnt fall, they jumped.
Zog_Jakome 04-18-08, 09:43 PM	And nowhere in the jump skill does it say "A sucessfull jump check superceeds gravity" what are we arguing about? are we arguing that if someone jumped too high they will take falling damage or are we arguing about the stupidness of allowing natural 20s to succeed on skill checks? Fine, i want to get to the bottom of a 100ft clif, so why "Jump down" and take fall damage. Acording to your rules i can long jump 5ft and land at the bottom of the cliff unharmed. wow I am just going to forget you said that. Odds of 1 nat 20? 1/20. Jumping you can retry indefinetly if you cant possibly jump far enough without a nat 20 to endanger yourself. You only get one chance at the tumble check, and thus yoru odds arnt good. if I try jumping to the highest possible distance off of the ground at which I can still breathe. which I have done the reasearch is around 100,000 feet give or take. eventually I am going to roll a natural 20 and in several rounds I am now 100,000 feet above the surface. According to the FAQ a character falls 500 ft in the first round, and 1,200 ft in the second and everyround thereafter. after doing the math I have 83 rounds to roll a natural 20 on a tumble check. That's not possible!!! Well, you cant actually take 20.... if you only get a 5000000 instead of a 1000000000 check result, it could be catastrophic! You have to roll till you get the actual 20..... it's not really taking a 20 it's keep jumping until a 20 is rolled is what I meant. Exactly, because a 20 isnt an auto sucess on a skill check. However, we where discussing what the implications would be if such a rule did, in fact, exist. Please try to keep up. ok that is what I was saying. a 20 always succeeding on skill checks is ludicrous . You are quite correct. This one is my fault, my example was concerning first level charactares, but i somehow forgot to include that in my post. sorry for any confusion my accidental ommission may have caused. However, acording to you, neither of them take ANY damage because they didnt fall, they jumped. I don't see why someone with a high speed (giving a huge bonus on jump checks), high strength, and ranks maxed out in jump, the spell jump cast on them, and several items enhancing the jump skill (giving different bonuses) would be hurt if they jumped 50 feet off the ground. if someone has such a high jump check they should be able to jump high and land without problem. now if you jumped up and came back down but continued to go down past the point at which you started your jump, you are now falling. but I will ask custserv about this just to be sure.
kalstrand 04-19-08, 12:49 PM	if I try jumping to the highest possible distance off of the ground at which I can still breathe. which I have done the reasearch is around 100,000 feet give or take. eventually I am going to roll a natural 20 and in several rounds I am now 100,000 feet above the surface. According to the FAQ a character falls 500 ft in the first round, and 1,200 ft in the second and everyround thereafter. after doing the math I have 83 rounds to roll a natural 20 on a tumble check. That's not possible!!! So now you have negated 10' of that jump what are you going to do about the rest of the 99,990 feet?
sblaxman 04-19-08, 01:15 PM	According to the FAQ a character falls 500 ft in the first round, and 1,200 ft in the second and every round thereafter. after doing the math I have 83 rounds to roll a natural 20 on a tumble check. Actually, you only have 1 round (the round you land). You can tumble all you want as you fall, but it's not going to make that landing any softer. (just going along w/ the ridiculousness at this point)
Zog_Jakome 04-20-08, 03:26 PM	So now you have negated 10' of that jump what are you going to do about the rest of the 99,990 feet? wow I asked wizards like I said I would and I must correct myself. you do take damage if you jump too high. that is really stupid but it's not my rules. I was bugging about it because in another game I am in someone has made up a class that allows someone to treat a high jump as a horizontal jump meaning that whatever the jump result was that is how high they jump. Actually, you only have 1 round (the round you land). You can tumble all you want as you fall, but it's not going to make that landing any softer. (just going along w/ the ridiculousness at this point) good point
ToastedAmphibian 04-21-08, 11:04 PM	what are we arguing about? are we arguing that if someone jumped too high they will take falling damage or are we arguing about the stupidness of allowing natural 20s to succeed on skill checks? A, as we are both in agrement concerning B. Most your other points where already adressed in other posts. I don't see why someone with a high speed (giving a huge bonus on jump checks), high strength, and ranks maxed out in jump, the spell jump cast on them, and several items enhancing the jump skill (giving different bonuses) would be hurt if they jumped 50 feet off the ground. if someone has such a high jump check they should be able to jump high and land without problem. now if you jumped up and came back down but continued to go down past the point at which you started your jump, you are now falling. but I will ask custserv about this just to be sure. Yes, speaking as someone whos character has a +61 jump mod, I can tell you from experience that this truly sucks... I wonder if there are any DMs out there that are sadistic enough to actually enforce this rule on dragon claw manuevers? "Ok, make a jump check, you have to beat your targers armor class. His AC is 40. Oh, ok, you got a 41. You fall on your oponent from 20ft above his head and take x dmg.... oh ya, you get a +2 to hit him...(Snicker snicker)"
Zog_Jakome 04-22-08, 03:42 AM	A, as we are both in agrement concerning B. Most your other points where already adressed in other posts. ... Yes, speaking as someone whos character has a +61 jump mod, I can tell you from experience that this truly sucks... I wonder if there are any DMs out there that are sadistic enough to actually enforce this rule on dragon claw manuevers? "Ok, make a jump check, you have to beat your targers armor class. His AC is 40. Oh, ok, you got a 41. You fall on your oponent from 20ft above his head and take x dmg.... oh ya, you get a +2 to hit him...(Snicker snicker)" pssst read the post right above yours. I said I was wrong. edit: I fail.
ToastedAmphibian 04-22-08, 04:37 PM	pssst read the post right above yours. I said I was wrong. Psst, read my post. I said that everythign else was already adressed in your posts. And that i agree, the rule sucks.
Blarghy 04-22-08, 10:28 PM	My earlier comment is that alot of dm's that I've run into have a auto success or failure with rolling 1's and 20's. Yes, we understood that. Zeratulcraft's point was that if you attempt to Jump to the next continent, once out of every 20 times you will auto succeed. Think about what that means for a moment. Well I use auto success/failure rules for skill checks in the game I DM, but only when they make sense (i.e. the guy trying to jump to the moon fails without a roll, etc.). Most DMs I've played with do the same.
Jaxgaret 04-23-08, 01:05 AM	Well I use auto success/failure rules for skill checks in the game I DM, but only when they make sense (i.e. the guy trying to jump to the moon fails without a roll, etc.). Most DMs I've played with do the same. So basically... if the PC was going to succeed anyway (i.e., it "makes sense" for them to pass the skill check on a roll of 20), then they pass the skill check. That's not the same thing as an auto success on a nat 20. At all. It's really more like the system I detailed above, where a roll of a 20 on a skill check is considered a +30; the PCs have a much better chance of succeeding on a roll of 20 than on a roll of 19, which imitates your fiat circumstance bonus for the PC rolling a 20.
Zog_Jakome 04-23-08, 06:48 AM	Psst, read my post. I said that everythign else was already adressed in your posts. And that i agree, the rule sucks. pssst... I fail now to address other points I agree that a natural 20 on any check should count for something but I was part of a group that got rid of the auto success/failure on everything, but then we changed it back because we got bored of not rolling, because we would succeed on any roll. so if you want go ahead and have the 20 = 30 and 1 = -10 (it should be -9 but it's -10 to make it easier to add) then it sounds reasonable to me.
Wheldrake 04-23-08, 07:48 AM	Well I use auto success/failure rules for skill checks in the game I DM, but only when they make sense (i.e. the guy trying to jump to the moon fails without a roll, etc.). Most DMs I've played with do the same. I agree: as long as the attempt is potentially risky, I rule a "1" automatic failure, and as long as success requires no more than an adjusted roll of 30, I rule a "20" automatic success, usually a spectacular or flamboyant success. Sure, this is a house rule. I use it to increase drama. An easy no-risk skill check isn't subject to autofailure, and an impossibly high check DR rule out autosuccess. Works for me. YMMV, --- Wheldrake
Shadowhowler 04-23-08, 11:58 AM	because we got bored of not rolling We are on such opposet ends of the game spectrum, you and I. I like to take 10 and 20 any chance I get, because I get bored rolling dice all the time. If it's not a stressfull situation... IE in combat or a chase or sneaking about, whatever... I hate rolling for every little thing. Annoying.
RoyalBlueEyes 04-23-08, 12:24 PM	Yes, speaking as someone whos character has a +61 jump mod, I can tell you from experience that this truly sucks... I wonder if there are any DMs out there that are sadistic enough to actually enforce this rule on dragon claw manuevers? "Ok, make a jump check, you have to beat your targers armor class. His AC is 40. Oh, ok, you got a 41. You fall on your oponent from 20ft above his head and take x dmg.... oh ya, you get a +2 to hit him...(Snicker snicker)" I, as a GM, would first ask, "How high are you jumping?" And if you wanted to jump high enough to where it would do damage to you, you would still take damage, but for each interval of damage you take I would add a bonus to the +2(well, more give you a +1 to damage at each interval). But the fact you would take HP damage, which with the ranks in jump doesn't mean I'd let you featherfall, but merely have the superhuman feats to jump higher, I would chalk up the HP damage to the strain of landing (even if on your opponent) and gravity. Shouldn't be too much, should it?
ToastedAmphibian 04-23-08, 04:01 PM	Normally i jump up the sides of a spiral staircase, or unto the roof of a buildign or something. Ocasionally i have jumped straight up to hit a flying opponnent though. It kinda sucks, but is ocassionally usefull. On a good roll, I can get 20+feet up. With a 5ft highet, and 15 foot reach, i can hit some critters at reasonable hieght. However, this is one of the reasons why i finally decided to take some ranks in tumbel....