Proposed house rule

I'm thinking of proposing a house rule for my table, and I thought I'd toss it out for discussion, let the folks here kick it around a bit.



The idea involves Tumbling: Right now the DC is a fixed number, 14 +2 for every creature whose AoO you're trying to avoid.

In Pathfinder I believe that the DC is based on the opponent's BAB. (please correct me if I'm wrong)

My idea is that, instead of an all-or-nothing roll that can become an absolute immunity to AoO, have it add to AC when evading Attacks of Opportunity.

I was thinking of something like, "Skill check - 10 gets added to tumbler's AC". That way a poor roll can actually hurt you, and no result ever actually makes you immune. (A Natural 20 still hits).

On the other hand, if someone does try to strike at a character that's Tumbling, they use their AoO for the round, something that doesn't happen now.

In a way this turns it into an opposed roll sort of thing. While that does slow game play by doubling the number of dice rolls, I don't think that's such a high price in this situation.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Alternatives?

Are you playing Pathfinder or 3.5?

In Pathfinder, your ability to avoid an AoO, due to movement through a threatened area, depends on your opponent's combat maneuver defense, and you take a speed penalty.

In D&D 3, the same ability is indeed a static number, and you're penalized in speed.

It's not an "absolute immunity" to AoOs. And it doesn't diminish the opponent's normal ability to hit the tumbler. So, I'd call it a non-issue. Adding a house rule is just going to slow combat down.

Greenfield said:

The idea involves Tumbling: Right now the DC is a fixed number, 14 +2 for every creature whose AoO you're trying to avoid.

Click to expand...

Nitpick: 15 +2 for each creature after the first. And you need to check for each creature you want to move past.

In Pathfinder I believe that the DC is based on the opponent's BAB. (please correct me if I'm wrong)

Click to expand...

Combat Maneuver Defence, which is derived from BAB.

My idea is that, instead of an all-or-nothing roll that can become an absolute immunity to AoO, have it add to AC when evading Attacks of Opportunity.

I was thinking of something like, "Skill check - 10 gets added to tumbler's AC". That way a poor roll can actually hurt you, and no result ever actually makes you immune. (A Natural 20 still hits).

...

Thoughts? Suggestions? Alternatives?

Click to expand...

Seems a fine rule change, though it does add a mite more complexity to an already-complex game. It's not something I would have used, for that reason, but YMMV of course.

The game in question is D&D 3.5, as noted in the thread tag. And yes, in D&D that roll is absolute immunity from AoO.

As in, you make the hard target number and the opponent doesn't get a swing.

My proposal simplifies things when avoiding multiple opponents, since you make one roll to determine the AC adjustment for the distance of the Tumble.

Opponents can choose to swing or not, since they might want to save their AoO for someone else this round.

In Pathfinder the target number varies depending on the opponent, but a successful roll is still absolute immunity. You make the roll and they don't get to.

As far as complicating things: Dice roll grants AC adjustment, then proceed normally. What's so complicated about that?