D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Tumble

[Hypersmurf]

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.

Monte's variant was Tumble vs Attack Roll.

If the attack roll beats the Tumble check, the AoO uses a separate attack roll, not the same one.

If I were going to come up with a Tumble variant and weren't concerned about making it a little more complex, I'd go with Monte's Attack Roll version, but use Dex bonus instead of Str bonus on the opposed check. The AoO attack roll would use the normal ability modifier.

-Hyp.

 

[Steverooo]

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...

Simply not true. The PHB (3E) Specifically states that in order for a Trained-Only skill to be used, the PC must have one Rank in the Skill... Half Ranks do them no good.

Even then, the PC only has (6 + DEX Bonus) in 20 chances of dodging, so it's hardly a "waltz". This mechanic is no worse than Trips or Unarmed Attacks provoking AsoO, while anyone with one Feat (Improved Unarmed Strike) doesn't.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Even then, the PC only has (6 + DEX Bonus) in 20 chances of dodging, so it's hardly a "waltz". This mechanic is no worse than Trips or Unarmed Attacks provoking AsoO, while anyone with one Feat (Improved Unarmed Strike) doesn't.

You misunderstand.

Once correcting for the half-rank mistake, his point remains. If an ogre blocks a narrow doorway, someone with one rank in Tumble can get past him. In al likelihood, they'll provoke an AoO... but unless the ogre trips or grapples them, the rules do not allow him to prevent them getting past.

Without that one skill rank, they're required to Bull Rush or Overrun to physically shove the ogre out of the way... and as an opposed check, there's every chance they'll fail.

One rank in Tumble changes the rules of movement, whether or not they succeed in their Tumble check.

-Hyp.

 

[Thyrwyn]

Very well said Hyp.

I like the 'opposed by attack roll idea - or maybe even just basing the DC on the opponents BAB for simplicity (less die rolling, faster play)

Opposed roll gooood.

Static DC baaaad.

-Hyp.

fluid DC good, too.

 

[Darklone]

Old One uses DC 10+highest BAB of opponent to tumble past and DC 20 + the same to tumble through hostile occupied spaces.

I love that rule.

 

[green slime]

But why are you people suggesting basing the opposing roll on BAB? Why is it easier to get past a rogue (who is more likely to see the trick coming) than a fighter?

(opposing BAB + dex + d20) vs (tumble check) to see if you avoid the AoO, and if the AoO hits, you stop moving. Sort of puts some more meaning into Mobility.

 

[Celtavian]

re

I think I will make it an opposed check. DC: BAB+Dex+D20. A rogue or other class with the Bluff skill can bluff a person if they want to avoid AOO's while tumbling. That'll work for our campaign since we don't allow AOO's anytime you lose your dexterity bonus.

 

[Liminal Syzygy]

Opposed roll gooood.

Static DC baaaad.

I disagree. Making it an opposed roll introduces a lot more variability, so much so that I think most players will not use Tumble against dangerous enemies unless it is a do or die situation.

But actually I wouldn't have a problem if not for this cascade effect -- Making it more dangerous to Tumble makes it more difficult for a Rogue to get into flanking position. Making it more difficult to get into flanking position means the utility of sneak attack, the Rogue's premier combat skill, takes a huge hit.

So the opposed check in AU is ok with me as there are no rogues and I suspect no sneak attack skill (only affecting your ability to get a +2 to hit).

I am ok with the escalating static DC idea though, because as there is a single roll too much variability doesn't become a problem.

 

[Tellerve]

I'm not sure which idea I like best, although I believe we play with the 10+bab and 20+bab, but I could be wrong.

I do have a question that someone brought up about the tumbling person and getting hit on their AoO. As was mentioned it stops your movement. Is this a de facto rule, as I am wondering if you charged a giant, and he hit you with his AoO, would you be at the outskirts, well ok 5' in, his radius of reach and stopped in your tracks? What if you were moving to attack, and during that move you got an AoO from a failed tumble roll and got hit, stopping you. You still have a standard action left or are you done for the round?

Thanks,

Tellerve

 

[Shard O'Glase]

my rules are this 10+bab or 20+bab. Failure means you're stopped, failure by 5 or more means you're stopped and prone.