Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="StreamOfTheSky" data-source="post: 5215727" data-attributes="member: 35909">Thanks for giving examples.  Would you say these monsters have about the average or median CMD for their CR, generally?I think +8 is more likely, maybe +10 for a Halfling.  You get 3 ranks +3 class, maybe they'll have an 18 dex, but point buy is really expensive in PF, even with a +dex race, I'd expect a +2 or +3 more likely.  And there could be a small armor check penalty.  So...about half chance of working.  Better with skill focus.10 ranks, +3 class...+6 dex at level 10?  Factoring in everything as above and assuming a less massive dex...i'd put that at +17 or +18 at best.  So, less than 50% chance of working!  Should I be concerned that with levels, your ability to tumble has gotten worse?Interesting, I'll keep those items in mind.  Terrain in many combat environments can also significantly boost DCs, also.  Out of curiousity, how often in high level PF does a Fighter have to suck down buffing potions in order to hit things more than half the time with his first attack?  I'm guessing not often...Thank you for using a fair dex and other numbers.  Not every tumbler will want to spend a feat, though, not every tumbler will have access to Rogue talents, and some tumblers may need to live with a -1 or -2 armor check penalty for their AC to be suvivable.  But yeah, that's a fine build, let's work with that. Where did you figure out your own CMD to be 23?  In any case, CMD 23 at level 6 sounds reasonable, so you succeed 65% of the time.  That's a fairly acceptable risk chance to me.  But...for someone without all of those benefits listed above, for a less than absolute ideal tumbler, the failure chance hinges closer to 50%, which is simply too much for me to consider it worthwhile.As I figured.  I was holding out hope in the line of thinking of, "If you fail a Search check, you're no worse off than someone who never bothered to try searching."  In that case, anytime the movement loss actually mattered to me, it'd only be worth tumbling if the success rate was extremely high, IMO.Well, getting less damage for jumping down expertly does make sense.  That's why it was in 3E, but the same goes for rolling on landing to reduce damage, too.  I just don't understand why if they could only keep one, they would remove the option that is more generally likely to come up.Wow, that's nice!  What's he have?  13 ranks, +3 class, +6(?) dex +6 skill focus?  Nah...the most that could ever get is a 38...  Boots of Striding and Springing and Halfling race would help, but still be far from regularly rolling 40+.As for "wuxia," a lot of the lesser penalties like uneven ground could come up during battle at any level if the DM cares much about using varied terrain and could make a low level acrobat's checks a nightmare, IMO.You assure me?  CMD rises with level just as tumble does, and between the BAB and two stats adding to it, can potentially rise faster than Acrobatics in the long run, if you don't invest in Skill Focus.  The examples I replied to above demonstrate pretty clearly that, whether your chance of success is 65%, 45%, or whatever... it is most certainly no where near "tumbling at will" by level 10.  Really, the more I look at the numbers, the more it looks like Skill Focus is required just for the skill to even be reliable...Ok, I need to address this, I guess.  A high tumble character in 3E was not untouchable.  Enemies could hit their AC just fine.  Nor did tumble ever let you ignore the big melee brute.  All it did was allow you to fight on your terms -- skirmishing with a move and standard attack each round, rather than standing still and full attacking like the big melee brute probably wanted.  He could still move up on his turn and whack you, even if tumble auto-succeeds.  The equilibrium of things is still maintained.  And while skirmishing may benefit you more (or more likely, deprive the enemy of more benefits than it deprives you of), you, the acrobatic fighter, almost certainly had lower attack, hp, damage (PA fighters/barbs do more than sneak attackers with a single attack), and AC than the brute.  So you needed any edge you could get.As long as the enemies were challenging and could kill you, "automatic tumbling" didn't make combats easy for mobile characters.  It made them possible to survive.Why do people need to use such outrageous hyperbole when talking about 3E tumble?</blockquote>

Verification