What Tumble variant do you use?

[Roland Delacroix]

My players have been complaining about the Tumble rules lately, so i looked at other variants. The Sword and Fist option, opposed Tumble checks didn't seem all that great. The Song and Silence option, opponent makes a reflex save vs Tumble check with a +10 if moving through, seemed better except a pain to calculate all the modifiers. I was wondering what other people had used and how it worked out.

Mods: Since these rules are 'official' variants in WotC splatbooks I placed this here instead of House Rules.

 

[Henrix]

I use something Monte mentioned (I think) a while ago, before any of the other variants, which is that the opponent makes an opposed attack roll vs. the Tumble check, if that succeeds they may make a normal attack.
I am considering moving to reflex saves, but that means I, the DM, would have to look up the opponents reflex save, while their attack bonus already is loaded in my head!

 

[IceBear]

I always note what a monster's Saves and attack rolls are...both are equally difficult to administer in my opinion. I use the one from Song and Silence as it is more official.

IceBear

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I use it as written in the PH. Personally I think there is no need for a change. People should be happy that as a default AoO are automatic. If people want a check to still get an AoO against a tumbler then they should have to make a check for when someone just runs through a adjacent square waving there hands with no attempt to tumble. I like the base system that as a default you provaoke AoO for doing some stuipid things, but a person can make a check to do the stuipid thing in such a way to not leave an opening. Once you decide to change tumble, the same logic could and perhaps should be applied to other similar things like concentration checks. Lets see how much the mage likes the ruling that it is an test to see if he can cast defensively.

 

[SableWyvern]

Hey Shard: I use the Monte variant - and apply the same logic to combat casting. So far, it's only benefitted the players, so there haven't been any complaints.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Hey Shard: I use the Monte variant - and apply the same logic to combat casting. So far, it's only benefitted the players, so there haven't been any complaints.

Maybe but the logic still doesn't jive with me. I still go with if there is some opposed test of any kind then even when I'm not tumbling and just dancing around you, you should have to roll a check to see if there is an AoO. If the monte varient doesn't require an opposed check but instead differnt dcs ignore me.

 

[SableWyvern]

Shard:

Just so we are both on hte same page, the variant I'm using is -

Tumble past DC = attack roll
Tumble through DC = attack roll + 10
Defensive Casting DC = attack roll + spell level

(Although I don't have a spell fail on a failed defensive cast check; only if the caster is actually hit).

Your reasoning for not using these variants makes sense - however, I use them because it's easy for Rogues with maxed out tumble or casters with maxed out concentration to make their checks every time by the time they're around 10th level or a bit higher, with a big impact on how combat plays out.

Personally, I think it should be easier to tumble safely past the innkeeper's wife and her rolling pin, than the king's dragonslaying champion.

While prepared actions can help prevent completely free tumbling and casting everywhere, they are not an adequate solution, IMHO.

In summary, I find opposed checks make for a more reasonable use of tumble and defensive casting at higher levels, but sticking with the default rule is not necessarily a Bad Thing (tm).

 

[EOL]

I came up with the reflex save varient months before I ever saw Song and Silence. I guess great minds think alike...

 

[Shin Okada]

What is wrong with PHB ruling?

Playing this game for almost 2 years now. Both PCs and NPCs are using Tumble and Spring Attack often. Also, there are some PCs (like some paladins and such) who lack those abilities and draw AoA regularly. Non of the members of my play group have complained about current PHB ruling on Tumble.

 

[Thanee]

We also use the Monte Cook version for Tumble, that is...

Every opponent that would be denied his AoO can make an attack roll (with a +10 bonus, if you tumble through a square occupied by him). If he beats your Tumble roll (that is, rolls higher, not equal), he can make an AoO.

EDIT: Oops, forgot to add, that if you get hit while tumbling through an occupied square you get pushed back into the square before entering the occupied square and your movement stops there.

For ease of play, opponents can take 10 on this roll, which has to be decided before the Tumble check is rolled, of course.

Bye
Thanee