D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Tumble

[Delgar]

I was just curious if it is known how tumble works in 3.5. I know that I heard a rumor that the mechanic was changing but I haven't heard anything about it since the books have trickled out?

Is it still a static DC?

Can anyone help me?

Thanks in advance

Delgar

 

[EricNoah]

It's the same as 3.0, though there's a list of conditions which can modify the DC for the tumble check, based on the condition of the floor. For example, a "severely obstructed" surface such as a natural cavern floor, dense rubble, dense undergrowth) adds +5 to the DC.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Opposed roll gooood.

Static DC baaaad.

-Hyp.

 

[andargor]

Opposed roll gooood.

Static DC baaaad.

-Hyp.

Very well said Hyp. Write a book: "Game Design for Dummies".

Andargor

 

[EricNoah]

I agree, I would like it to be an opposed roll as well. I think a dextrous monster or a monk or a rogue should have a good chance of countering the "tumble around to flank" maneuver. (maybe if they win an opposed tumble check they get to move to an adjacent 5' square right after the tumble, thus foiling a potential sneak attack? eh, this probably isn't the place to get into all the problems and possibilities...)

 

[coyote6]

I agree, I would like it to be an opposed roll as well. I think a dextrous monster or a monk or a rogue should have a good chance of countering the "tumble around to flank" maneuver. (maybe if they win an opposed tumble check they get to move to an adjacent 5' square right after the tumble, thus foiling a potential sneak attack? eh, this probably isn't the place to get into all the problems and possibilities...)

I thought the Song & Silence solution (opposed by a Ref save, with a +10 bonus vs. tumbles through your space) was nice, though I haven't tried it to see how well it works.

 

[niteshade6]

I never had a problem with static DCs. The way I see it is either you let your guard down or your don't. If you aren't performing an action that draws an AoO, your enemy doesn't get one no matter how skilled he is.

I could see how trying to tumble through somebodies square might be alot harder for more skilled enemies though. Though that's a pretty hard check as is. Might be nice if you had some chance not to make it through the square though.

 

[Saeviomagy]

What I don't like is the fact that taking but a half-rank in tumble will allow you to waltz through opponents squares (albeit provoking AoO's), while having no such skill forces you to make overrun attacks...

 

[Pax]

I never had a problem with static DCs. The way I see it is either you let your guard down or your don't. If you aren't performing an action that draws an AoO, your enemy doesn't get one no matter how skilled he is.

The problem is that those who shoudl be best able to counter this trick -- skilled veteran warriors -- are also the least likely to succeed. IIRC, a Fighter and a Wizard have the same reflex bonus.

Which means the Wizard is no easier to tumble past than his fighter companion -- or to reverse it, the fighter is no HARDER to tumble past than the Wizard is!

IMO, that just doesn't make sense.

 

[Celtavian]

re

I think the DC's are a little low. I would like some kind of opposed roll or scaling DC's. If you have a decent Tumble skill, Mobility becomes nigh on useless.