Anti-Tumble Feat

[TarionzCousin]

I see what you mean. Tumble is clearly the problem here

Well, there are obviously several problems.

The PC in question is size tiny, so he has to enter Joe Monster's square to attack him. I just want to give Joe Monster at least one AoO before he gets annihilated.

Concentration: Casting defensively: your check result, if higher than your AC, is your AC against Attacks of Opportunity for casting while threatened. [add Combat casting and dodge bonuses if applicable to this check result.]

Tumble: Does not prevent AoOs, Your check result, if higher than your AC, is your AC against Attacks of Opportunity for moving through threatened areas. To this check result, add Mobility and dodge bonuses along with a bonus to this check = to double the creature’s size penalty. [Large=2, Huge=4, Gargantuan=8, Colossal=16]

Sounds good. I'll give it a whirl. Thank you very much, Mr. DM.

 

[amethal]

All you had to say was "I don't know, nor do I have anything useful to say"

Haven't you read my sig?

 

[Drowbane]

Haven't you read my sig?

"Crothian is incapable of telling a lie. And Diaglo cannot multiclass. [Greylock]"
I don't follow.

Also, I would just like to say that I didn't mean my response above to be quite so... jerkish. Sorry mate.

 

[Bavix]

Tumble

I just add the opponent's BAB to the Tumble DC. For example, it's a DC 20 to tumble past a 5th-level fighter and a DC 30 to tumble through his space. It's easy and makes "combat types" a little more threatening.

 

[frankthedm]

I just add the opponent's BAB to the Tumble DC. For example, it's a DC 20 to tumble past a 5th-level fighter and a DC 30 to tumble through his space. It's easy and makes "combat types" a little more threatening.

I'd say 10 plus BAB. Thus treating the average foe as having 5 BAB.

I'd recommend also applying the size modifier to that DC.

 

[JustinA]

Is there a feat from WotC that enables Joe Monster to make an AoO when a PC tumbles to attack him? Rumors tell of an ancient Dragon magazine--possibly even 3.0--that had such a feat and it was official.

I think it's easier to just fix the rules for Tumble.

(That link discusses the 10 most common solutions to the problem... and why none of them work. Many of them have been mentioned in this thread. It also offers a workable solution.)

Justin Alexander
http://www.thealexandrian.net

 

[Drowbane]

I think it's easier to just fix the rules for Tumble.

Oh, nice. I'm so adopting this for my Homebrew, and I'll attempt to convince my DMs of its genius (shouldn't be difficult).

Thanks!

 

[TarionzCousin]

I think it's easier to just fix the rules for Tumble.

(That link discusses the 10 most common solutions to the problem... and why none of them work. Many of them have been mentioned in this thread. It also offers a workable solution.)

Justin Alexander
http://www.thealexandrian.net

This is good stuff. Thanks!

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Humm. Do they get to add their deflection and luck and other bonuses to this? If so then that does not sound too bad.

Nope, just the tumble bonus. It still means that they have a good chance to get a really nice AC.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Step 2: combat monster PC who can/does...

1) charge/pounce
2) has Shadowblade feat with a really high dex mod (I think he just hit 50ish dex)
3) TWF chain and Chaos Monk (dragon mag?)... something like 6-9 attacks
4) and about 7d6 Sneak + Shadow Blend + Darkstalker feat5) typically only misses on a 1

PC with pounce? Thats a problem.
PC with Dex of 50ish? Thats a problem.
PC with 6-9 attacks? That's a problem.

Tumble? Not a problem at all. Tumble doesn't add anything to the above situation that they couldn't get equally well with Spring Attack (regardless of the undoubtably massive AC that the 'PC' above had too, which might make most AoO moot)

In other words, Amethal's succinct statement still stands. What comes at 'step 2' which wins the game just because of max tumble ranks?