-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Tumble - Isn't it broken?
- Thread starter Ron
- Start date
Malin Genie
First Post
Yep, TV's rule is the goods! The only clarification I would add is that we allow Mobility to add +4 to the AC *after* the Tumble check; so a character with AC 16, Tumble check of 19 would have AC 23 vs an AoO with Mobility, rather than Moblility just improving AC to 20 (which is then better than the Tumble check.)
This makes Mobility combined with Tumble a really effective combination for those characters willing to invest in it.
This makes Mobility combined with Tumble a really effective combination for those characters willing to invest in it.
Darkness8Me
First Post
Tumble is fine the way it is. Furthermore, if you change the mechanics for tumble, you better start working on some new rules for casting defensively.
Also, I'm amazed that people never seem to notice (or at least mention) that casting a 9th level spell defensively is easier than tumbling through an area occupied by an enemy (DC 24 vs. 25).
Also, I'm amazed that people never seem to notice (or at least mention) that casting a 9th level spell defensively is easier than tumbling through an area occupied by an enemy (DC 24 vs. 25).
Shard O'Glase
First Post
I don't think there is a problem. You are liited to 20' of movement, and all it does it make it so you move in sucha way that you don't provoe AoO. I think AoO get a big enough benefit in that as a default you can get one, even if you are the most incompetent, unskilled, absentminded, unperceptive combatant in the world. Given that the rules is AoO no check needed on average, it makes sense that your DC to move in such a way that you don't leave an oppening for an AoO should be static. If you want opposed checks, then the person with the sword better make opposed checks every time someone would provoke an AoO, and not just get them automatically.
A big burly bouncer is guarding the door to the tavern. "None shall pass.", he proclaims stoically, folding his beefy arms across his chest.
As a DM, how would handle this? Anyone with Tumble can move through this guy as is they were incorporeal, even if they fail the roll! Is there any way that a guy could block a doorway such that no-one could get through without moving him or taking him down?
And once you come up with your solution for this stalwart NPC, see if you would apply the same rules to your party Paladin as he tries to hold a door against a horde of charging orcs, while your character lies incapacitated just inside.
As a DM, how would handle this? Anyone with Tumble can move through this guy as is they were incorporeal, even if they fail the roll! Is there any way that a guy could block a doorway such that no-one could get through without moving him or taking him down?
And once you come up with your solution for this stalwart NPC, see if you would apply the same rules to your party Paladin as he tries to hold a door against a horde of charging orcs, while your character lies incapacitated just inside.
Shard O'Glase
First Post
The bouncer could ready an action, same for the paladin. Also if guarding a doorway it seems reasonable that unless facing a 1/2ling or gnome, you could probably take up enough space that none could pass. It doesn't matter how good the tumble skill roll is if there isn't any space to move through. A 5' sqaure normally isn't taken up entirely by a character, a doorway very well might be.
kamosa
Explorer
I don't think tumble was designed to allow tumble past someone that takes up the whole door way. I didn't read any place in the rules that said tumbling made you insubstantial and able to pass barriers without consequence. I think as a GM you could easily make the case that if the body wouldn't through any of the gaps between the door and the bouncer, no tumble past could be accomplished. If that doesn't fit your fancy, add a situational modifier to the roll. Tumbling through someones space is a +10 modifier. I'm guessing that tumbling through someones space where there is no room to maneuver could be +20 or more depending on the beefiness of the guard.
I disagree with the idea of taking away the tumbles AoO protection. Without this protection you turn your thief into just another stripped down fighter. The tumble allows them to fill a role in combat other then second rank fighter. It allows you to maneuver to take on foes in the back ranks, or change position so you can use your backstab. I know maneuver is a dangerous thing in most GM's mind's, but it is pretty cool to the players and it does add flavor to your fighting style as a thief.
I disagree with the idea of taking away the tumbles AoO protection. Without this protection you turn your thief into just another stripped down fighter. The tumble allows them to fill a role in combat other then second rank fighter. It allows you to maneuver to take on foes in the back ranks, or change position so you can use your backstab. I know maneuver is a dangerous thing in most GM's mind's, but it is pretty cool to the players and it does add flavor to your fighting style as a thief.
Nareau
Explorer
Yet another house rule
IMC, I set the DC to tumble around someone at 10 + their highest attack bonus. The DC to tumble through someone is 20 + their highest attack bonus.
This does a few things: It prevents me from having to make yet another roll (as others have suggested be done with Ref saves). It keeps me from having to figure out the critter's BAB (which some varient tumble-rules demand). And it reflects the combat prowess of the opponent. It also scales really well with character level vs. monster attack bonuses. At 8th level, PC's can have roughly +15 to their Tumble checks. A quick search of CR 8 monsters shows that they seems to have attack bonuses in the +12 to +17 range.
The problem I have with TV's suggestion is that it doesn't fit my campaign very well. The only character with Tumble usually has an AC of 24 or so. He's maxxed out his tumble check at about +15. If I understand TV's rule, then this maxxed out tumble score will only benefit the character at all 50% of the time (if he rolls a 10 or higher). And even when it does benefit him, it won't do so by a whole lot.
We came up with a very similar rule to TV's, and eventually decided not to go with it. Which is not to say it isn't a good rule...it just doesn't fit for us.
In addition to all this, I also rule that if you don't hit the high DC for tumbling through an opponent, you just can't do it (in addition to provoking an AoO, if applicable). This prevents the whole "I have 1 rank in Tumble, and you already wasted your AoO! Pbbthth! I walk through you, ghost bouncer!"
IMC, I set the DC to tumble around someone at 10 + their highest attack bonus. The DC to tumble through someone is 20 + their highest attack bonus.
This does a few things: It prevents me from having to make yet another roll (as others have suggested be done with Ref saves). It keeps me from having to figure out the critter's BAB (which some varient tumble-rules demand). And it reflects the combat prowess of the opponent. It also scales really well with character level vs. monster attack bonuses. At 8th level, PC's can have roughly +15 to their Tumble checks. A quick search of CR 8 monsters shows that they seems to have attack bonuses in the +12 to +17 range.
The problem I have with TV's suggestion is that it doesn't fit my campaign very well. The only character with Tumble usually has an AC of 24 or so. He's maxxed out his tumble check at about +15. If I understand TV's rule, then this maxxed out tumble score will only benefit the character at all 50% of the time (if he rolls a 10 or higher). And even when it does benefit him, it won't do so by a whole lot.
We came up with a very similar rule to TV's, and eventually decided not to go with it. Which is not to say it isn't a good rule...it just doesn't fit for us.
In addition to all this, I also rule that if you don't hit the high DC for tumbling through an opponent, you just can't do it (in addition to provoking an AoO, if applicable). This prevents the whole "I have 1 rank in Tumble, and you already wasted your AoO! Pbbthth! I walk through you, ghost bouncer!"
So if the bouncer beat's the rogues init roll (yea, right), then he can stop that ONE person. The rest, of course would all be free to breeze right by him.
I guess DM intervention is the only solution. You just have to make a "doorway blocking" rule to prevent Tumbling silliness.
Similar Threads
