Seeking Clarification on Ability Checks

[thecrimsondawn]

If someone was to take a -1 penalty to all Strength and Dexterity ability checks, what all would be taking this penalty?

[weckar]

Not much. You rarely roll such checks,

[Baroncognito]

If someone was to take a -1 penalty to all Strength and Dexterity ability checks, what all would be taking this penalty?

Well, on a strength check, you add your strength modifier to the check. So with a 14 strength, you'd get +2 to a strength check.

So you'd roll 1d20 and add 2. With the stated -1 penalty, it would be

1d20 +2 -1, or 1d20 +1

[Kurald Galain]

If someone was to take a -1 penalty to all Strength and Dexterity ability checks, what all would be taking this penalty?

Mainly to lifting heavy things (str) and to initiative (dex). Usually the wording of such penalties (e.g. from the fatigue condition) states they apply to str- and dex-based skills as well, e.g. climb and stealth.

[Yanisa]

Mainly to lifting heavy things (str) and to initiative (dex). Usually the wording of such penalties (e.g. from the fatigue condition) states they apply to str- and dex-based skills as well, e.g. climb and stealth.

Lifting things is based on your carry capacity, a fixed value (based on your strength). The only case of lifting something you can't carry I could find is lifting up a prone vehicle. There might be others too, scattered in the rules.

The most common strength checks includes breaking items (breaking down doors and walls, snapping ropes and chains.). That also includes breaking out of anything that captures you. Ropes, vines, ice, slime, magic, etc.
Another huge source of strength checks come from dealing with environmental hazards. Think of things like trying to save a floating creature out of the water (or quick sand), fording a river or walk during a severe storm. Or swimming without ranks in the swim skill.
Some traps, alchemical devices and siege engines use strength checks.
Then there is the very specific spell Peacebond disallows you to draw your weapon unless you make a strength check.

Beyond initiative, the only other dexterity check I can find is is that an untrained sleight of hand defaults to a dexterity check. (This might also count for other skills, but I can't find RAW for that.)

Also there is an Advanced Armor Training that follows you to ignore penalties from hastily don armor with a strength or dexterity check.

[Kurald Galain]

Breaking things. Good point, that's clearly a strength check (arguably there should have been a "bend bars / lift gates" skill based on strength, but there's not).


swimming without ranks in the swim skill.
That's still the swim skill; just because you have zero ranks doesn't mean it's not a skill check.


Also there is an Advanced Armor Training that follows you to ignore penalties from hastily don armor with a strength or dexterity check.
Note that like the fatigued condition, the penalties from heavy armor do explicitly apply to all str and dex skills (regardless of how many ranks you have).

[Yanisa]

That's still the swim skill; just because you have zero ranks doesn't mean it's not a skill check.

True. I was referring to like one instance you get both options and took it for granted it was so in all cases. It's from the environmental rules water

... fast-moving water is much more dangerous. Characters must make a successful DC 15 Swim check or a DC 15 Strength check to avoid going under.

The swim check gives the same DC for fast... errrm... rough moving water. Seems to be the same thing? Then again, I'm not a water expert, maybe there is a really logical reason fast water and rough water are called out different. (And follow different rules for failure even.)

[Elder_Basilisk]

I would presume that fast moving water has a strong current and rough water may or may not have a strong current but either has obstructions or weather causing lots of waves, eddies, etc. So a swift flowing stream is fast moving, a lake in a storm might be rough water, and rapids are both fast moving and rough.

Not that I'm an expert on water but that's how I'd run it as a DM.

[Kurald Galain]

The swimming rules were clearly written by someone who cannot swim. The whole idea of making a check each round to try to move is completely ridiculous.

And yes, rough water means that it's storming.

[Deophaun]

The swimming rules were clearly written by someone who cannot swim. The whole idea of making a check each round to try to move is completely ridiculous.
Why? Logic says normal swimming is represented by taking 10, so outside of rough water or combat, the average person would have 0 problem moving forward, which is actually generous when you consider the normal result of people who are "untrained" in real life.

[jmax]

Important note - if it says Strength- and Dexterity-based checks, that includes all skill checks that depend on Strength and Dexterity. As stated earlier, that's usually how it's written, and it would be unusual for it to exclude skill checks. But it's worth calling that out specifically.

[thecrimsondawn]

Oh wow, I did not see any replies to my thread the day I made it and now it has 10! ^^

Thanks for the feedback all. Its what I was looking for :)

[Kurald Galain]

Why? Logic says normal swimming is represented by taking 10, so outside of rough water or combat, the average person would have 0 problem moving forward, which is actually generous when you consider the normal result of people who are "untrained" in real life.

So you are agreeing with me that making a check each round to try to move is completely ridiculous, because your logic says you're using a rule to avoid making a check each round.

[Yanisa]

Important note - if it says Strength- and Dexterity-based checks, that includes all skill checks that depend on Strength and Dexterity. As stated earlier, that's usually how it's written, and it would be unusual for it to exclude skill checks. But it's worth calling that out specifically.

Minor detail, but I rarely see the term "based check" without also specifying what kind of check (e.g. based skill check). In fact, I found like 5 with googling (https://cse.google.com/cse?q=%22based+check%22&cx=006680642033474972217%3A6zo0hx_wle8#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=%22based%20check%22&gsc.page=1). I don't think there are a lot more.

[Bavarian itP]

So you are agreeing with me that making a check each round to try to move is completely ridiculous, because your logic says you're using a rule to avoid making a check each round.

But taking 10 is part of the rules, too. "Rule X is ridiculous if you forget about Rule Y, while both are part of the same ruleset" is not a very convincing argument. The swimming rules were (presumably) written with the option of taking 10 in mind.

[Jormengand]

But taking 10 is part of the rules, too. "Rule X is ridiculous if you forget about Rule Y, while both are part of the same ruleset" is not a very convincing argument. The swimming rules were (presumably) written with the option of taking 10 in mind.

Still, I would be totally capable of swimming consistently when in immediate danger or distracted. I bet I could even swim perfectly fine while being shot at. The idea that I, with my 1 rank, +3 trained bonus and -1 strength penalty, would have a 3/10 chance each round to fail at swimming if someone were threatening me is a little silly. Even a raging melee in the water around me doesn't have an appreciable effect on the fact that I'm actually able to swim consistently up until one of the attacks actually hits me.

[jmax]

Minor detail, but I rarely see the term "based check" without also specifying what kind of check (e.g. based skill check). In fact, I found like 5 with googling (https://cse.google.com/cse?q=%22based+check%22&cx=006680642033474972217%3A6zo0hx_wle8#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=%22based%20check%22&gsc.page=1). I don't think there are a lot more.

It is fairly rare. But it's an extremely important detail on, for example, the Circlet of Persuasion (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/c-d/circlet-of-persuasion/). It's the difference between +2 only on opposed checks with charm person/monster and planar binding and also getting +2 on Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, Gather Information, Intimidate, Perform, and Use Magic Device.

At least one instance - the Nymph's Kiss feat - says "Charisma-related" checks instead. Just to be difficult :-P

[Deophaun]

Still, I would be totally capable of swimming consistently when in immediate danger or distracted. I bet I could even swim perfectly fine while being shot at. The idea that I, with my 1 rank, +3 trained bonus and -1 strength penalty, would have a 3/10 chance each round to fail at swimming if someone were threatening me is a little silly. Even a raging melee in the water around me doesn't have an appreciable effect on the fact that I'm actually able to swim consistently up until one of the attacks actually hits me.
Threatening means your movement provokes, which implies that you are engaged in combat, not simply swimming by. What qualifies as distracted is up to the DM. If you think it's ridiculous that something is distracting to the point of being unable to take 10 while swimming and yet you enforce it on your players, then you are being ridiculous, not the rules.

[Jormengand]

Threatening means your movement provokes, which implies that you are engaged in combat, not simply swimming by. What qualifies as distracted is up to the DM. If you think it's ridiculous that something is distracting to the point of being unable to take 10 while swimming and yet you enforce it on your players, then you are being ridiculous, not the rules.

They don't use the term Threatened: they use the term "In immediate danger" (probably precisely to stop this 3.5-era nonsense of assuming that you can't be threatened unless you're Threatened, which is one of the fixes that PF should never have had to make since the intent is obvious either way and even in 3.5 you can't threaten a creature, only a square (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/attacksOfOpportunity.htm#threatenedSquares)). If I'm in combat, I'm still in immediate danger (and threatened) even if no-one's actually swinging greatswords at me every time I pass. And pretty much nothing would distract me enough that it would prevent me from swimming consistently in calm water: the fact that no indication of what "Distracted" means is given is just the icing on the cake.

[Deophaun]

They don't use the term Threatened: they use the term "In immediate danger"
Fair enough. I forgot this was pathfinder and to deduct 10IQ points from the designers.

even in 3.5 you can't threaten a creature, only a square (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/attacksOfOpportunity.htm#threatenedSquares)).
You might want to read your link more closely, because your statement is false.

the fact that no indication of what "Distracted" means is given is just the icing on the cake.
It is a shame that Complete Distractions was cancelled so early into its production.

[Kurald Galain]

But taking 10 is part of the rules, too. "Rule X is ridiculous if you forget about Rule Y, while both are part of the same ruleset" is not a very convincing argument. The swimming rules were (presumably) written with the option of taking 10 in mind.

That means they're still ridiculous in any situation where you cannot take 10, or where taking 10 is not enough to reach the DC.