Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="StreamOfTheSky" data-source="post: 4793136" data-attributes="member: 35909">I'd still like to know what martial prowess (something not well portayed at all by attack bonus and still not so great by BAB when looking at monster CRs) has to do with stopping a tumbler.&nbsp; I have never once heard a good argument for that.&nbsp; It usually seems to come down to some concept that Fighters should be good at controlling the battlefield around them, more a 4E implant, and something the base class alone does not offer at all.&nbsp; You can take feats to do some of that, like Stand Still.&nbsp; It kind of reminds of the argument that Fighters shouldn't easily succumb to effects like mental domination...even though by the numbers, they will.My argument is simple: The more you know about tumbling, the better you are at stopping it.&nbsp; Does that mean a regular fighter w/o Tumble as a class skill will be very bad at stopping it?&nbsp; Hells yes!&nbsp; A swashbuckler or Warblade, on the other hand, could become quite good at it.&nbsp; If they train on tumble, they know how to stop it better, too.&nbsp; And outside of core, there are feats a Fighter could take to add Tumble to his skill list.&nbsp; Or you could make a variant Fighter.&nbsp; I have one called the Gladiator, Swashbuckler is sort of like a big ol' variant Fighter....And as others have thankfully chimed in to support what I said, tumbling past someone is not a big deal.&nbsp; It's not like you just stabbed him with your sword.&nbsp; I have never heard people say Monks or Rogues are broken in combat.&nbsp; Quite the opposite.&nbsp; What do you think removing a part of the game THEY RELY ON -- safely tumbling around -- will do?&nbsp; I don't mind someone putting a little focus on stopping tumbling and who knows it themselves giving such characters a hard time.&nbsp; Will it happen often?&nbsp; No.&nbsp; I don't think it should.&nbsp; But once in a while, when facing a fellow acrobatic dervish, it's fun to be tested.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="StreamOfTheSky, post: 4793136, member: 35909"] I'd still like to know what martial prowess (something not well portayed at all by attack bonus and still not so great by BAB when looking at monster CRs) has to do with stopping a tumbler. I have never once heard a good argument for that. It usually seems to come down to some concept that Fighters should be good at controlling the battlefield around them, more a 4E implant, and something the base class alone does not offer at all. You can take feats to do some of that, like Stand Still. It kind of reminds of the argument that Fighters shouldn't easily succumb to effects like mental domination...even though by the numbers, they will. My argument is simple: The more you know about tumbling, the better you are at stopping it. Does that mean a regular fighter w/o Tumble as a class skill will be very bad at stopping it? Hells yes! A swashbuckler or Warblade, on the other hand, could become quite good at it. If they train on tumble, they know how to stop it better, too. And outside of core, there are feats a Fighter could take to add Tumble to his skill list. Or you could make a variant Fighter. I have one called the Gladiator, Swashbuckler is sort of like a big ol' variant Fighter.... And as others have thankfully chimed in to support what I said, tumbling past someone is not a big deal. It's not like you just stabbed him with your sword. I have never heard people say Monks or Rogues are broken in combat. Quite the opposite. What do you think removing a part of the game THEY RELY ON -- safely tumbling around -- will do? I don't mind someone putting a little focus on stopping tumbling and who knows it themselves giving such characters a hard time. Will it happen often? No. I don't think it should. But once in a while, when facing a fellow acrobatic dervish, it's fun to be tested. [/QUOTE]

Verification