D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Tumble

[Lord Pendragon]

It occurs to me that if a hill giant can use his BAB to negate my rogue's tumbling, then my rogue should be able to use his tumbling to negate the giant's hit.

After all, it's plausible that a circus acrobat is harder to hit than a fighter in full plate.

So I propose that from now on, those with access to tumble be allowed to add their ranks in tumble to their AC when taking an AoO.

 

[Pax]

So I propose that from now on, those with access to tumble be allowed to add their ranks in tumble to their AC when taking an AoO.

That's what I'd've rather seen Tumble DO: replace some element of the character's AC with their ranks in Tumble. PErhaps their Dex Bonus, up to double the Max Dex Bonus limit of their armor.

Thus, the opponent gets to TRY and whack you anyway, but your ability to tumble and move erratically makes it HARDER to actually HIT you.

Or a +1 Dodge bonus to AC, versus AoOs prompted by movement, for every 5, or 4, or 3 ranks of Tumble you have, rounded up.

Either of those would IMO be better than "I don't care HOW legendary a warrior you are, screw you: no AoO allowed! hah!"

 

[green slime]

It occurs to me that if a hill giant can use his BAB to negate my rogue's tumbling, then my rogue should be able to use his tumbling to negate the giant's hit.

After all, it's plausible that a circus acrobat is harder to hit than a fighter in full plate.

So I propose that from now on, those with access to tumble be allowed to add their ranks in tumble to their AC when taking an AoO.

But you can: When fighting defensively, or taking a total defense action, your rogue's AC is higher because he has 6 ranks in Tumble.

 

[Jens]

Good ideas, Pax. I especially like the idea of giving a dodge bonus to AC against movement related AoOs.

As it is, DC 15/25 makes you immune to AoOs and I think the skill should still be about as useful.

I think the mechanic should require a skill check (not just ranks) so that skill bonuses are still meaningful.

How about giving a dodge bonus to AC against movement related AoOs equal to the number of points a skill check is made by? Setting the DCs at 10 and 20 for vacant/occupied space gives +5 if making the 'old' check. +5 is not immunity but lower passes give *something* and better checks give more.

Alternatively, the skill check can simply replace '10+Dex' in AC while tumbling, effectively replacing the '10' by d20 + ranks + skill bonuses. A creature whose space you tumble through should then get a +10 to its AoO against you.

 

[Magac]

One thing to remember about the giant and the kobold.

level 1 you find a kobold. your tumble will have about 4 to 8 to your skill. (dex and number of ranks) so to tumble through you need either 17 to 20 roll to tumble through kobold.

this is where it starts to be a problem.

what level do you meet the giant? 10?

so you got your ranks in tumble + dex etc you pumped them up so that you can succeed on 10 ok goign around is easy going through is still only 50 50 its easier to tumble a giant but then you designed your chr to do this.

how about adding sense motive of the thing to tumble past to the roll this wouldnt take away too much from the rogue. maybe the giant will figure out that the rogue intends to get past him and uses that to stop them. doesnt make much of a difference but it means a fighter would have had to develop sense motive to be able to prevent the rogues from using its sneak attack bluff skill and the same sort of training will allow the fighter to prevent being tumbled past. that allows for the trained warrior beinga ble to stop them. If you never trained for it them you sol.

 

[Cinerarium]

Re: Re: Re: Re: how about 2 ogres

Irrelevant; Tumble lets you move and not trigger ANY AoOs.

I am so smart. S-M-R-T.

I'll go back to lurking and writing story hours now, at least until I'm not at work and posting half-cocked.

But the second part of my post still stands; I'd argue for a higher DC in general, and circumstance modifiers when you've got something like the ogre-in-doorway situation mentioned earlier. I visualize a hockey goalie blocking a puck.

 

[Hardhead]

I am so smart. S-M-R-T.

I'll go back to lurking and writing story hours now, at least until I'm not at work and posting half-cocked.

Don't worry about it. Everyone does that every now and then!

 

[Lord Pendragon]

But you can: When fighting defensively, or taking a total defense action, your rogue's AC is higher because he has 6 ranks in Tumble.

But that's a static change. If you have 5 or more ranks in Tumble, you gain a small bonus to fighting defensively.

Static = bad.

Opposed = good.

 

[isoChron]

Static = bad.

Opposed = good.

I have a déjà vu ...

 

[Igarashi]

Or a +1 Dodge bonus to AC, versus AoOs prompted by movement, for every 5, or 4, or 3 ranks of Tumble you have, rounded up.

This is what they did for tumble in the Neverwinter Nights Expansion, only I'm pretty sure they rounded down : P