Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ruleslawyer" data-source="post: 1106466" data-attributes="member: 1757">No offense, Celtavian, but my point is that your other reasons have nothing to do with the mechanics of the Tumble skill.What happens when you have a "strong" combatant (a duelist or outsider) with the Tumble skill, then? The point is that Tumble should NOT be the sole means of balancing rogues and monks with fighters; if that's the case, then it's an overpowered skill, because giving it and nothing else to a "strong" (i.e., good BAB) combatant supposedly would break it, according to this argument.A Tumble check that, say, uses the opponent's attack roll as the success DC still favors the rogue or monk. It just removes the guaranteed success chance. Again, the problem isn't that Tumble shouldn't be used, but rather that the static DC means that the success chance becomes automatic, regardless of opponent, by about 10th level even for a reasonably average tumbler.It's also possible to ready an action to disrupt the casting of wish; does this warrant moving the spell down a few levels and removing the XP cost? Again, you're talking more general combat consequences that are not specifically geared toward the Tumble skill, but apply to combatants using any number of combat options. As such, this argument is value-neutral with respect to the mechanics issue at hand.This is a fair point. You won't be able to Tumble (1) past a Colossal creature (2) without a double move (3) if you're a rogue who has no movement-boosting capability. Conditions 1, 2, and 3, my friend. That's hardly illustrative of the default situation.House rule, and thus not relevant to the discussion. And the rogue, the duelist, or indeed anyone who's likely to use Tumble in the first place. This is like saying that high-level spells are underpowered because they're restricted to characters with high ability scores, which scores are used to set DCs anyway. Incidentally, a heavily-armored dwarf can use Tumble just fine. The issue is good game mechanics, not "verisimilitude." Like you, I don't really care about verisimilitude. That doesn't stop me from wanting my game mechanics to support good play. For instance, I like the evasion special ability. Doesn't mean I want it to work even on a failed Reflex save.You're coming back to your original point of trying to use static Tumble DCs to balance everything. That's a danger sign right there. Tumble DCs should have very, very little to do with whether a class is balanced overall. (Incidentally, the point is that rogues can use Tumble more and more at high levels because the check becomes automatic and thus entails no risk. The problem with a static Tumble DC is that you go from a moderate risk of failure with low-level consequences at low levels to NO risk of failure with any consequences at medium to high levels.) Fair, but I don't see it as "less fun," but YMMV. You've made the argument that Tumble DCs need to be kept static in order to balance out the (*sniff*) otherwise underpowered rogue class FOUR times in this post. Once again, I'll say that it's not relevant to the issue of how Tumble works mechanically and that if static Tumble DCs are needed to balance what otherwise would be a weak class, then Tumble is just too important, which is bad rules.Wait a minute; that's FIVE times.Right; and those are seriously important benefits from the rogue's perspective. (Incidentally, Tumble also allows the monk to tumble up to casters and Stunning Fist them without having to spend... count it, THREE feats.) If rogues and monks want to be able to "tumble" with the total impunity you advocate (and it is total), they should have to spend the three feats that anyone without the Tumble skill would to do so.  You seem to be confusing good game mechanics with story value here. I'm not trying to say that this is better from a "cinematic reality" perspective, but from a game balance and game play perspective.Bingo.Ah yes; the rogue, who receives 8 + Int bonus skill points per level. For the price of maxing Tumble (probably about 1/10th of her skill points, assuming a human rogue with 12 Int), she gets the equivalent of what a fighter needs a Dex of 13 and three feats (MUCH more than 1/10th of a 10th-level fighter's available feats) by 10th level and gets much more out of Tumble than the fighter would.That's good; I use those as well, and have no problem with those being a set DC because they don't allow for level-irrelevant strategy.Still, I can see that set Tumble DCs work in your game. They don't in mine (or certainly, they didn't in three years of 3e gaming), so I went with the opposed roll, which DOES work well and better. And my rogues still Tumble.</blockquote>

Verification