Climbing, Jumping & Swimming Rules

[AsenRG]

IDK, I handle all three of these as stat rolls with some bennies based on character stuff. I'm playing without a skill system of course, but stat rolls seem to work just fine.

You're playing Maelstrom, right?

 

[Fenris-77]

You're playing Maelstrom, right?

Hah. No. Black Hack in this case.

 

[xanther]

Minutes? You should measure in rounds. In Novus 2e, I use the following rules (complications add either 3 or 5 to the Target Number of the task).....

What is the difference between a minute or round? IRL I go by boxing, so 1 round = 3 minutes. I use minutes etc. as these are time units with a definition we all know, easy enough to convert to whatever time increment a game uses.

In Novus 2e, for Jumping, I use the following rules This would use the Acrobatics or Athletics skill. A single Jump Increment (JI) is equal to the height of the character. A basic running long jump, with a 20’ running start will be equal to 3x the JI for the character. Increasing the jump by 1 JI adds a Major Complication; one half of a JI increase would be a Minor Complication. A standing broad jump, without a running start, is equal to the JI of the character. Each one half of a JI increase for a standing broad jump adds a Major Complication. A high jump, with a 20’ running start, would one JI as the basic TN. Each one half of a JI increase in height would be a Minor Complication, while a full JI increase in height would be a Major Complication.

This makes it based on the height of the character (complications add either 3 or 5 to the Target Number of the task)

I like that idea of the base increment based on height, gravitated towards it (or a generalize height) in the past.

 

[xanther]

IDK, I handle all three of these as stat rolls with some bennies based on character stuff. I'm playing without a skill system of course, but stat rolls seem to work just fine.

How do you handle, distance and/or speed of movement under this approach?

 

[xanther]

As to the differences in difficulty of various climbs, there is a rating system for that in the real world, with good descriptors of the type of climb. My references are all to YDS (a common US system when learned this stuff).

If it matters to any answers, I take a different view of these things if one has all day vs. time is of the essence. I roll dice and get into details only when it could matter. If one has all day on an easy climb you are just going to be able to do it.

Just as a heads up, all that I will do with my own rules is going to be based on an overarching Athletic Talent and/or Attributes. "Skills" related to climbing, etc. are more a form of specialization/focus that improve one's chances but are not required to perform the action. Again the base assumption is an in shape character, someone who would have no problems doing several pull ups or one pull up with some gear on, i will not try to capture those who fall below that mark with any real rules.

Or should say what I have done (do have rules for this stuff for the past 30+ years (various iterations and approaches), just always believed this is an area where there is room for creativity...hence the thread to survey the collective wisdom and expereince of the RPG Pub.

 

[Fenris-77]

How do you handle, distance and/or speed of movement under this approach?

I don't worry too much about specifics but rather focus more on the difficulty of the task. Roll under systems work well for thus because the stat is the direct target number, so STR for jumping is quite nuanced. I will apply negative mods for hard or very hard tasks as necessary.

In the case of swimming movement, its more about faster or slower for example. Black Hack handles distance and movement in range bands rather than discrete numbers so it works fine. In a different system more granular detail might be necessary.

 

[xanther]

I don't worry too much about specifics but rather focus more on the difficulty of the task. Roll under systems work well for thus because the stat is the direct target number, so STR for jumping is quite nuanced. I will apply negative mods for hard or very hard tasks as necessary.

In the case of swimming movement, its more about faster or slower for example. Black Hack handles distance and movement in range bands rather than discrete numbers so it works fine. In a different system more granular detail might be necessary.

Fair enough. In practice I tend to make it more qualitative and abstract as well except do like to have some quantitative touch stones for design purposes and even just a base example.

Personally, using jumping as an example, don't want to count feet or any lower unit especially. Even if in competitive sports things can be measured well, in a adventure environment there are so many other factors, personal and environmental, i.e., this is not some groomed track with people using gear designed for this.

I'm more along the lines there is a base distance that is automatic. If you are particularly out of shape, carrying a lot, some other detriment you'd roll to make it. Otherwise you only roll to cover larger distances, perhaps land on the other side and attack without penalty, etc. It is what those larger distance may be where I like some quantitative bench marks (which certainly have) then can play with how much success one needs to reach the outer limits.

Also we need to include mechanics where a fighter can throw a dwarf farther than they can reasonably leap.

 

[AsenRG]

Hah. No. Black Hack in this case.

That was my third guess!
The second was "White Hack" though, so close enough.

 

[Skarg]

(1) Climbing: I do not know if I have ever seen a set of rules for this that makes any sense to me based on lived experience. I grew up climbing all sorts of stuff, trees to the very top, cliffs, rocks, the rough walls...readily doable with the right shoes and easy with climbing shoes. Not a particularly strong kid, but likely dexterous, and certainly never any training to years later and even later before started using ropes.
Yet every set of game rules ever come across on the subject would say what I did regularly was impossible, and should be dead. (For the record the one time I did fall was a failed Intelligence check). Even when what I did was possible, many rules make climbing abysmally slow.

Let's say I have climbing skill. Under TFT for example I can climb 2 yards per minute with handholds, or a yard per 2 minutes without. I can easily debunk that by going to the rock wall at my local REI and climb 2 yards in 10 seconds.

Great topic!

I too would love the "best" rules for climbing, jumping and swimming.

Isn't the rock wall at your local REI a bit easier than a wall or cliff not designed for safe climbing? So REI removes the parts about having to find a good series of handholds, and handholds that might break, no?

Climbing rates in TFT for people with Climbing talent in easier situations include:

An already-prepared path of spikes and rope: 4 yards per minute (so 2 yards in 30 seconds)
A freely-hanging rope, or rope ladder: 2 yards per 5 seconds

So perhaps TFT is not all that far off your experience, if you extrapolate? That is, in reality there isn't one climbing speed. It depends on the person, exact situation, how careful they're being, etc.

Certainly the climbing rules could use more detail and discussion of situations.

What would you suggest to make these more like your experience?


BTW GURPS offers:

"ordinary mountain" 1 foot / 2 seconds, so 2 yards in 12 seconds
"vertical stone wall" 1 foot / 5 seconds, so 2 yards in 30 seconds
"modern building" 1 foot / 10 seconds, so 2 yards in 60 seconds
"rope up, without equipment" 2 feet / second, so 2 yards in 3 seconds

Those are the hurried in-combat times. The times given for regular climbing are about 1/3 that speed.

 

[Spellslinging Sellsword]

If you haven't seen it, there is a cool documentary on Netflix called The Dawn Wall that documents Tommy Caldwell free climbing some very difficult areas.

 

[Rasyr]

What is the difference between a minute or round? IRL I go by boxing, so 1 round = 3 minutes. I use minutes etc. as these are time units with a definition we all know, easy enough to convert to whatever time increment a game uses.

In Novus, a round is 5 seconds long. (so we are talking about 12 rounds in a minute).

 

[xanther]

Skarg
Thanks for those times. I guess it really depends on the route description if with TFT and GURPS does lines up with expereince. On the REI rock wall, or them in general...it depends on the section. If find the artificial rock walls both easier and harder if that makes any sense.

If reading TFT and GURPS correctly these are slow times, for the easy stuff. I would consider these cautious times and f understanding the rules correctly that could make sense as believe these are the speeds for guaranteed success.

Based on the below rating descriptions, the REI wall near me is 5.6 to 5.7 depending on route. As a point of reference my daughter when 8 did the 5 yard or so high wall in less than 10 seconds on her second try. The upper limit would say is the world speed climbing record which is about 16 yards in 6 seconds, or 15m in 5.something seconds. Which is lining up very well with how world record sprint speeds line up with my mechanics.

There are so many descriptions out there for even YDS it seems, here is a short one tongue in cheek one found really like think will modify (certainty as get to 5.10 and above ) I like it determined by number of holds, I will modify for how "good" it is and if here s an overhang (and perhaps how technical it is). As my wont will do it fairly quantitative for design and then abstract it greatly for rules. Also need to think what they mean by a "hold"

Without further ado:

Subdivisions of class five climbing

In Mountaineering, Freedom of the Hills, author Ed Peters explains the subdivisions of class 5:
"The experienced climber, having accomplished or attempted free climbs of varying degrees of difficulty in the YDS class 5 range, gains an understanding of the level of difficulty involved. To the beginner, however, these ratings are simply a set of numbers, understandably, easy if rated 5.0 and impossible if rated 5.13. To provide a slightly better understanding within the class for the beginner the following tongue-in-cheek description is provided:

5.0 to 5.4There are two hand- and two footholds for every move; the holds become progressively smaller as the number increases.

5.5 to 5.6The two hand- and two footholds are there, obvious to the experienced, but not necessarily so to the beginner.

5.7The move is missing one hand- or foothold.

5.8The move is missing two holds of the four, or missing only one but is very strenuous.

5.9The move has only one reasonable hold which may be for either a foot or a hand.

5.10No hand- or footholds. The choices are to pretend a hold is there, pray a lot, or go home.

5.11After thorough inspection you conclude this move is obviously impossible; however, occasionally someone actually accomplishes it. Since there is nothing for a handhold, grab it with both hands.

5.12The surface is as smooth as glass and vertical. No one has really ever made this move, although a few claim they have.

5.13This is identical to 5.12 except it is located under overhanging rock." Ratings are established on lead; the follower has a somewhat easier climb.

 

[xanther]

Update, for those interested, have decided on the following for how I'll address climbing.

I use a count success system, but similar could be done with target numbers/difficulty classes I think.

Difficulty Ratings and How They Work (SC = abbreviation for success)
Difficulty: -1 (you can ignore up to 1 failure)
Difficulty: 0 (need 1 SC to move base movement distance)
Difficulty: 1 (need 2 SC to move, 1 to overcome obstacle and 1 for base move)
Difficulty: 2 (need 3 SC to move, 2 to overcome obstacle and 1 for base move)
etc.

Difficulty: is determined by the climb, number and types of holds, surface, angle. I set the bar high for this, a move that is missing one hand or foot hold is Difficulty 0. Overhangs up to 45 degrees always add +1 Difficulty. Sheer walls (no holds) will have high difficulty and require gear.

Gear: Gear does not lessen difficulty, it removes failures and/or gives you a skill bonus.

Only in special cases will you need a SC to hold on to the rock (such case can be when have been hanging a long time, holding up a lot of weight, get hit, etc).

How to Proceed:
"Safe Mode": roll the dice and then declare what maneuver you are going to perform, failures can be ignored if you stay in place.
"Push It Mode": you get an extra die to roll BUT you must declare you maneuver first and if you don't get enough SC to succeed you automatically receive 1 failure.
"Hold On": what you need to do in a special case, it adds +1 Difficulty to any maneuver, if you have multiple special cases each adds +1 Difficulty.

Effects of Failure:
Safe Mode: Failures don't do anything but you are stuck in place.
Push It Mode: Each unaccounted for failure (that is one not canceled by a SC) results in Stun damage. When your Stun HP reach 0, you fall.
Hold On/Special Cases: if you need a SC to even stay in place treat as if you "Pushed It" and your minimum maneuver is to hold on, but you don't get the extra dice.
If you Pushed It and have a Special Case: The special case adds +1 difficulty as above under "How to Proceed"


Design Discussion:
On Gear: This is a game mechanic way of doing it, of course gear lessens difficulty in real life it can provide a hold where there is none. The reduction of failures coupled with failure to proceed results in the overall same effect as "real life", hence verisimilitude. also reducing difficulty means one has extra SC that could be applied to move. I don't want gear to make getting over an inversion with one hold as fast as climbing a ladder as lower Difficulty always means more SC to apply to movement while removing Failures means just less bad things happen but no automatic extra good things.

Deciding what you do after you roll:
Somehow imposing the effect if you fail you fall just never seemed right to me, or more so could never get the right balance between frequency of succeed (all is great) or fail and possibly die. HP to the rescue as I like the warning track type feel they give, it provide a consequence but one that is less than death.

In actual climbing if you are paying attention and the rock has no surprises you rarely make a move that won't succeed, you test it, shift your weight etc. Sure people fall, and take a lot more risk when roped, but the frequency of falls as given by RPG game mechanics seems way out of proportion to anything approaching real life.

Now you may not fall, but you can only hold on so long in one place or so much, hence the special cases.

Pushing it:
Yet at times you take a risk and push it (in real life rarely if not roped). I like players to take such risks, so give them an extra die to roll, but with the realization if they do so failures are going to hurt. That extra die may be needed to move further to get off the rock face fast, or it could be to tackle an obstacle. Sometimes a failure that keeps you in place can be death and you need to move.

Also I find players do not mind failure that hurts if they make the choice to do so, and I don't want just slow and steady climbing to pose that risk as want a bunch of climbing.

Edited to fix typos

 

[AsenRG]

Update, for those interested, have decided on the following for how I'll address climbing.

I use a count success system, but similar could be done with target numbers/difficulty classes I think.

Difficulty Ratings and How They Work (SC = abbreviation for success)
Difficulty: -1 (you can ignore up to 1 failure)
Difficulty: 0 (need 1 SC to move base movement distance)
Difficulty: 1 (need 2 SC to move, 1 to overcome obstacle and 1 for base move)
Difficulty: 2 (need 3 SC to move, 2 to overcome obstacle and 1 for base move)
etc.

Difficulty: is determined by the climb, number and types of holds, surface, angle. I set the bar high for this, a move that is missing one hand or foot hold is Difficulty 0. Overhangs up to 45 degrees always add +1 Difficulty. Sheer walls (no holds) will have high difficulty and require gear.

Gear: Gear does not lessen difficulty, it removes failures and/or gives you a skill bonus.

Only in special cases will you need a SC to hold on to the rock (such case can be when have been hinging a long time, holding up a lot of weight, get hit, etc).

How to Proceed:
"Safe Mode": roll the dice and then declare what maneuver you are going to perform, failures can be ignored if you stay in place.
"Push It Mode": you get an extra die to roll BUT you must declare you maneuver first and if you don't get enough SC to succeed you automatically receive 1 failure.
"Hold On": what you need to do in a special case, it adds +1 Difficulty to any maneuver, if you have multiple special cases each adds +1 Difficulty.

Effects of Failure:
Safe Mode: Failures don't do anything but you are stuck in place.
Push It Mode: Each unaccounted for failure (that is one not canceled by a SC) results in Stun damage. When your Stun HP reach 0, you fall.
Hold On/Special Cases: if you need a SC to even stay in place treat as if you "Pushed It" and your minimum maneuver it so hold on, but you don't get the extra dice.
If you Pushed It and have a Special Case: The special case adds +1 difficulty as above under "How to Proceed"


Design Discussion:
On Gear: This is a game mechanic way of doing it, of course gear lessens difficulty in real likes at can provide a hold where there is none. The reduction of failures coupled with failure to proceed results in the overall same effect as "real life", hence verisimilitude. also reducing difficulty means one has extra SC that could be applied to move. I don't want gear to make getting over an inversion with one hold as fast as climbing a ladder as lower Difficulty always means more SC to apply to movement while removing Failures means just less bad things happen but no automatic extra good things.

Deciding what you do after you roll:
Somehow imposing the effect if you fail you fall just never seemed right to me, or more so could never get the right balance between frequency of succeed (all is great) or fail and possibly die. HP to the recuse as I like the warning track type feel they give, it provide a consequence but one that is less than death.

In actual climbing if you are paying attention and the rock has no surprises you rarely make a move that won't succeed, you test it, shift your weight etc. Sure people fall, and take a lot more risk when roped, but the frequency of falls as given by RPG game mechanics seems way out of proportion to anything approaching real life.

Now you may not fall, but you can only hold on so long in one place or so much, hence the special cases.

Pushing it:
Yet at times you take a risk and push it (in real life rarely if not roped). I like players to take such risks, so give them an extra die to roll, but with the realization if they do so failures are going to hurt. That extra die may be needed to move further to get off the rock face fast, or it could be to tackle an obstacle. Sometimes a failure that keeps you in place can be death and you need to move.

Also I find players do not mind failure that hurts if they make the choice to do so, and I don't want just slow and steady climbing to pose that risk as want a bunch of climbing.

I think I need to adopt this subsystem.

 

[xanther]

I think I need to adopt this subsystem.

Thanks. I am going to try to generalize out all the principles to apply to jumping and swimming. I'm good with safe mode on climbing as can't you hang there forever so there is a fuzzy limit on how many attempts, have ideas on other types of limits to jumping and swimming.

In that regard may add in a small Stun damage (I use Stun damage as fatigue, strain, etc.) each turn spent climbing so safe mode has a more built in self limiting counter than me drawing a line where it has been "long enough" that you are now a "special case" then may also allow a SC in this regard to be used to recover fatigue to provide verisimilitude that those who are more skilled can perform a task more efficiently and get less tired at it than the unskilled.

Basically for me, if you can just roll until you succeed I'd skip the rolling to succeed entirely and you'd only roll for how long it takes you, if there is no time pressure.

I'd be willing to sacrifice the current climb safe mode for an approach that is a subsystem structure that applies to all such risk inherent movement.

 

[Skarg]

"2 SC to move, 1 to overcome obstacle and 1 for base move"
What is the difference between "move", "base move", and "overcome obstacle"?

 

[xanther]

"2 SC to move, 1 to overcome obstacle and 1 for base move"
What is the difference between "move", "base move", and "overcome obstacle"?

I may be using "base move" and "move" interchangeably, mostly because don't like to keep typing base move.

In general though a "base move" is the base distance you move for applying 1 SC to movement. If one has 2 SC they apply to movement then you move two times the base move distance. So your total move would be "base move" times number of SC applied to move.

An "obstacle" is something you need to address before you can do something else with an action. It is stated this way as each SC provides a quantum of action.

When I say moving takes 2 SC to perform on a Difficulty 2 climb there is a question: Does the 2 SC mean that to perform a quantum of movement I need 2 SC; thus if I want to move 2 times base distance do I need 4 SC? Hopefully the phrasing answers the question. The answer is on a Difficulty 2 climb section you only need 3 SC to move 2 times base distance, 1 SC to overcome the obstacle and then your extra 2 SC can be applied to movement.

Thinking on that perhaps I should change that. However the way it is currently phrased is the same rule mechanic for other things, like if aiming for the head takes 3 SC: the first two 2 SC are "consumed" in the aiming and the third SC (and any extras) actually can be used to do damage.

Also the way I phrase it still has ambiguity, what if I roll only 1 SC on a Difficulty 2 climb, does that mean I can use the 1 SC this turn to "overcome" the obstacle and not have to face it next turn? I try to be pretty fluid let the situation decide...but would likely say NO because it require me to track what happened last roll (by taking a "note") to the next roll, and doing so would make application of the mechanic different than things like aiming.