Are tumble Checks too easy?

[Hypersmurf]

How is the check not active? You're doing something in the hopes of hitting someone. Sounds pretty active to me.

No, you're not. You're making a roll to determine if they provoke an Attack of Opportunity. You're not doing anything, and you're not (yet) hoping to hit anyone.

Until the roll is resolved, you don't have the option of doing anything active, because it's not your turn.

If your roll beats theirs, then they have provoked an AoO. At that point - and not before - you have the option of doing something active.

Also, why even make the roll if you don't want to hit them?

So you know what your available options are. It doesn't matter whether you want to take the AoO or not - when they attempt to Tumble, there's an opposed roll (whether it be an opposed skill check, attack roll, ability check, saving throw, or whatever) to determine if their action - avoid provoking an AoO - was successful.

Attempting to hit someone is in no way "a roll made to avoid (at least partially) damage or harm." That's the definition of a saving throw. How does it make sense to use a saving throw when you're not even meeting the definition of the term? If that were the way it was supposed to wrk, they could simply have made the counter to Bluff be will save + saving throw.

I wouldn't have had a problem with that.

An attack roll is "A roll to determine whether an attack hits" (glossary) or, if you prefer, "An attack roll represents your attempt to strike your opponent on your turn in a round" (combat section. Yet it's the mechanic we use to resist being disarmed.

I don't have any qualms about using a Reflex Save as the basis for determining "Was he quick enough to avoid giving me an opening?"

-Hyp.

 

[James McMurray]

I reckon we'll just have to "agree to disagree" then.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I reckon we'll just have to "agree to disagree" then.

... even though you currently use reflex saves in your campaign...?



-Hyp.

 

[hong]

Re: Re: re

The real problem I have is, it's no harder to tumble past the Advanced (+1,000,000 HD) Paragon Prismatic Dragon (CR around a million and a half), than it is to tumble past a random inkeeper's 12-year-old son with a wooden toy sword.

I've told you a million times, don't exaggerate.

That's just wrong to me. Absolutely and utterly wrong.

About the level of "beat up a kid and take his lunch money" wrong. Maybe not quite "build weapons of mass destruction" wrong, but more than "tomato sauce on ice cream" wrong. And yeah, definitely more than "Frank Sinatra singing rap music" wrong.

Really? Are you sure? That's funny, because I run a just-epic-level arena, ECL 25 in fact. And Tumble checks there are pushing into the 40's and 50's. To-Hits, even for rogues, tend to be at the point where the first attack bonus is no more than 5 less than the vast majority of ACs (the only exceptiosn are, those people who really PUSHED for high AC, and sacrificed a lot elsewhere).

Things like money, sex, violence... and all I got was this lousy T-shirt!

Actually, IIRC without exception, the highest ACs in Exodus have been possessed by monks and rogues.

I can understand wanting to possess ACs. With the heat lately, everyone wants an airconditioner.

And at least SOME of the characters in that arena have been "BBEG Tests" ... people running their possible BBG for the end of a campaiogn through it's paces under the equivalent of a "D&D combat stress test".

All this talk about BBGs and DDs is making me think of battleships. PAX IS RUNNING HARPOON! RUN AWAY!!!1!

... if they don't have 4 more levels of Rogue than the tumblers has levels of an Uncanny Dodge class ... they're not going to get sneak attack.

... but they will get... DRAMATIC PAUSES! Pity about ... the lack of BOLDFACE... and ALL CAPS, though.

How about balance. How about verisimilitude. How about, I'd like to see Tumble's DC be set to start at "15 plus the opponents BAB, whichever is higher", and then no opposed roll ... the opposed part would be in setting the DC. The better they are at combat, the better they are able to deal with people who want to try silly acrobatics in the middle of a fight.

How about, I dont like seeing entire feat chains rendered invalid by a skill.

But above all, don't forget the sunscreen.


Hong "trust me on the sunscreen" Ooi

 

[Hypersmurf]

Re: Re: re

The real problem I have is, it's no harder to tumble past the Advanced (+1,000,000 HD) Paragon Prismatic Dragon (CR around a million and a half), than it is to tumble past a random inkeeper's 12-year-old son with a wooden toy sword. That's just wrong to me. Absolutely and utterly wrong.

Actually... what's the face and reach on the Advanced (+1,000,000 HD) Paragon Prismatic Dragon?

Don't you run out of Tumbleisationess before you clear his threatened area?

-Hyp.

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Re: re

Actually... what's the face and reach on the Advanced (+1,000,000 HD) Paragon Prismatic Dragon?

Don't you run out of Tumbleisationess before you clear his threatened area?

Probably. 30 ft speed means a max of 3 squares of tumbling. Take a -10 penalty and you can go 6 squares. Personally, if I was facing a melee brute with 10' or 20' reach, I'd want to be much further away than 3 squares at the end of my turn.

 

[James McMurray]

... even though you currently use reflex saves in your campaign...?



-Hyp.

Yep. If I could think of a better (and just as simple) way to do it, I'd definitely use it in my campaign.

 

[Hypersmurf]

30 ft speed means a max of 3 squares of tumbling. Take a -10 penalty and you can go 6 squares.

Ah - I'd forgotten they'd removed the 20 foot limit.

There's nothing in 3.5 to stop you double-moving at half your speed while tumbling, right? So with 30 foot speed, you could double-tumble 6 squares, or 12 with a -10 penalty.

And monks go faster.

I liked the 20 foot limit.

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

A-ha! The perfect anti-Tumble defense!

Meet Loot, my Pixie Rogue cohort.

With his Natural Invisibility, it's easy for him to Sneak Attack and use his Hamstring feat.

Once he's landed one of those, you can't use your Tumble skill any more.

-Hyp.

 

[hong]

Ah - I'd forgotten they'd removed the 20 foot limit.

There's nothing in 3.5 to stop you double-moving at half your speed while tumbling, right? So with 30 foot speed, you could double-tumble 6 squares, or 12 with a -10 penalty.

Yeah, but you're not going to be doing much else that turn.

And monks go faster.

I liked the 20 foot limit.

Hey, if someone wants to play the flurry o' misses guy, more power to them.