D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Tumble

[Pielorinho]

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?

Yeah, we use what Tellerve said. I've got no problem with it being harder to tumble past a fighter than past a tumble-happy rogue: whereas the rogue specializes in being dodgy, the fighter specializes in hitting dodgy things. We don't, however, play that a failed tumble check stops movement (although maybe we should); if someone wants to stop you from tumbling, they need to try to trip you or something. Last night, a nasty undead spiked-chain-wielding monk did just that on a PC, nearly killing her.

Daniel

 

[mikebr99]

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.

Best use of 1 skill point I've ever seen...


YMMV


Mike

 

[MarauderX]

Best use of 1 skill point I've ever seen...


YMMV


Mike

Exactly. I think it's rule that can be abused pretty easily, and watching the fighter2/rogue1 tumble behind enemy lines to chew up the enemy time and again has made me realize this. His tumble bonuses added up so that he rarely would provoke an AoO, and he could be exactly where he needed to be (beside the casters) within 1 move. Meanwhile, our other melee guys were up front trying to chew down our foes toe-to-toe as spells were launched at them. Two rounds later, the fighter/rogue was tumbling into flanking positions behind them and turned the tide of the fight pretty easily.

Seeing this ease of (ab)use, I am creating a monk around the skill that can compliment the fighter/rogue behind our enemies' front lines.

I would agree with the 10/20+BAB as it makes more sense that the melee-types would be adept at seeing around such tactics, and experience in combat should account for something besides better stats after all.

 

[Grundle]

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.

With all the time spend "NERFing" gnomes, dwarves, etc. the design team couldn't find it in their hearts to make a simple fix to tumble checks?!

Unbelievable.

 

[Hardhead]

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.

I've been doing this ever since Song and Silence came out, and it's worked out beautifully. It has, in no way, made Tumble useless, but allowes very dexterous opponents to still get AoOs.

Also, as a house rule, in my campaign if you attempt to Tumble through an occupied space, and fail, and then get hit by the AoO, you fall prone in the space you were in before you tried to move through the occupied space. That keeps the "one rank tumblers" from moving through spaces and sucking up the AoO.

 

[Pielorinho]

With all the time spend "NERFing" gnomes, dwarves, etc.

See Daniel eye the can of worms!
See him struggle against temptation!
Will he resist opening the can?
Will he succumb?
Watch and find out!

Daniel

 

[Deset Gled]

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.

I don't think that the tumble skill is going to make or break the rogue. Flanking is not the only way to make a sneak attack. Feinting, blinking, being invisible, and winning initiative are just a few of the other ways that a rogue has to make sneak attacks besides flanking.

Beyond that, the tumble skill isn't that necessary to flank. Spring attack gets rid of the AoO from the primary target. Taking an AoO along the way, or even standing in a flanking position aren't out of the question, either.

 

[iwatt]

I'd still keep it 15+BAB/25+BAB. A Rogue2 with 16 Dex has a Tumble Check of: 5(ranks)+3(dex)+2(synergy)=10. If we use 10+BAB it means he will be tumbling around automatically against most 2HD creatures (assuming 3/4 BAB advance). Even against 4HD (+3BAB) he will have a 90% success rate. You'd have to set up a monster with a BAB of +6 to even cut this down to 80% succes rate (which he'd enjoy with the current DC 15 rule).

And it should only be BAB, without adding any abilty modifier. BAB is a measure of combat savy.

Of course this example is only the lower end of the spectrum, and I must confess that I haven't seen tumble abused yet in game (most of the rogues prefer to snipe with their arrows).
So this is only a first attempt to think it through. By the way, I don't think it should be an opposed roll (although I like that mechanic) because it would further lengthen combat. Having a creatures TR DC (Tumble Rection Diffculty Class) shouldn' be that much of a complication fo a GM.

This of course is only my 2 cents. (probably a bit more though )

 

[Saeviomagy]

I've been doing this ever since Song and Silence came out, and it's worked out beautifully. It has, in no way, made Tumble useless, but allowes very dexterous opponents to still get AoOs.

Also, as a house rule, in my campaign if you attempt to Tumble through an occupied space, and fail, and then get hit by the AoO, you fall prone in the space you were in before you tried to move through the occupied space. That keeps the "one rank tumblers" from moving through spaces and sucking up the AoO.

Except the problem is still there - you pick up a single rank in tumble, then wear heavy armour and use mobility. That AoO won't hit, and even if it does, you just take your attack from where you started...

 

[Silver Griffon]

No optional rule needed

Use the rules, luke.
If you see that a tumbler is involved in the combat, ready an action to hit him as he tumbles by. You aren't making an AoO so the tumble is irrelevant. I love the look on their faces when they get whacked during the middle of a tumble they just rolled a 30 check for.