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="StreamOfTheSky" data-source="post: 4818183" data-attributes="member: 35909">First off, one of the main issues is whether tumble needs a "solution."  The game assumes that after a few levels, you can generally tumble safely.  To change that would cause some major consequences on how the acrobatic classes play, and I've still yet to see a convincing argument that even with the easy tumble DCs, such classes fare so well in melee.Or you could just make an "anti-tumble" skill and add it to the lists of classes that you think should be good at stopping tumble.  I think that was a Song and Silence suggestion.  Sure, the ability to stop a Tumble is less useful to a person than the ability to tumble, so few would put in as many ranks for the defensive side.  But that just kind of mirrors Bluff/Sense Motive.  To anyone who needs to lie, bluff is invaluable.  Only a dedicated few would bother maxing SM just to defend against it.  In any case, winning against tumble should NOT stop the tumbler's motion, it should just let the succeeding character(s) take the AoOs that the tumbler would have provoked normally.  If you don't tumble at all, getting attacked doesn't halt your movement (without feats like Stand Still).Why doesn't the Tumbler get these as well then, instead of just the tumblee?Maybe for moving through their squares, but not the ones around them.You can leap over their heads with a somersault?  Overrun/Trample are completely separate mechanics and I don't think there exists a way for them to avoid an AoO, which is the whole point of tumble.  They instead overpower the defender, knocking them prone as you drive past or somesuch.Haste only adds +1 AC.  And if it doesn't add to initiative, why would it add to other forms of "reaction time"?A good suggestion, it'd be nice if Mobility was actually useful to a tumbler.After a while the Fighter tends to only miss his first attack on a 1 or if he takes a large PA/CE amount, except against certain foes more geared towards defense.  Isn't that also kind of ho-hum and boring?That episode was bs, frankly.  The ninja wouldn't keep fighting after losing the element of surprise, he'd run and pick a better opportunity later.  And when the main measure of weapon effectiveness is killing potential, you're kinda hamstrung when the show decides for 1 of your 4 weapons to use something that is incapable of killing...  Also, it was a Spartan Warrior, not a Trojan.  If you want to crack a joke, get your facts straight. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />I'm saying there's already classes to use if you want ot challenge the tumbler.  Note it's my opinion that challing a tumbler isn't something that should happen frequently.  Just on occasion, to spicen things up.  I don't have a problem with a Rogue dancing past melee brutes most of the time, only to once in a while face a fellow acrobat and find it difficult to outwit him with his motions.Wait, what?  My houserules allow a successful counter-tumble check to effectively negate the benefit of the tumbling, so the character is prone to the AoO(s) he would have provoked.  Failing to tumble well isn't causing AoOs, it means he's vulnerable to the ones he's already provoking for his movement.I've seen monks tricked out with Imp Natural Attack (unarmed strike), enlarged, high str... And you know what?  Devastating as their flurry of blows was, against any decent Fighter, Barbarian, giant, or similar focused brute, said monks would die if they traded full attacks and so needed the ability to hit and run.  It's also useful when the foe is using a reach weapon, since you're limited ot your natural reach with unarmed strike.  Just my experience.Actually, while I am still a novice, I HAVE trained in Capoeira, a rather acrobatic martial art.  One of the main goals in any Capoeira fight is to get behind the person.  If you can do so, you've effectively won the match.  We are taught not only different means of getting around a person's guard, but also how to notice when someone's doing it to us and how to react.  Do I think tumbling and acrobatics is practical when the other guy is in mail, and has a longsword and heavy shield?  No, of course not in real life.  I also wouldn't want to try attacking such a person unarmed if I could avoid it, no matter how many years I've practiced fighting unarmed.  And yet, the game allows me, with relatively novice-level training, to do both.  The game is not perfectly realistic.  But the game designers thought you should be able to do both, so here we are.  I'm just sick of the fearsome warrior logic.  If the guy's not even trained in tumble, and his only experience wiht it is seeing the party rogue do it, then why should he be good at preventing it?  A good acrobat/tumbler, if he lost momentum or got blocked in his first attempt, would keep his balance and flow into another attempt at going around, perhaps recognizing the first attempt doomed the instant he starts going that way, and so instead only movs a flinch and uses it as a diversion for the new route.  If the guy with weapons is scary to tumble past, I'd be terrified of tumbling past a wizard with fire shield!  Ow!I also find it kind of hypocritical of you to call automatically succeeding at tumbling boring, and yet also want to make moving around in combat less appealing by making it harder to avoid AoO's.  If I can just stand still and full attack the big tank guy, why should I take a fair risk of an AoO to disengage from melee? May as well just trade full attacks until I'm badly injured and need to withdraw.  Sounds exciting!  Note other systems like Iron Heroes that sought to make combat more dynamic and interesting increased the benefits of moving around a lot.Yeah, if you tumble badly, the opponent gets an AoO as you leave his threatened square, the same as just moving without tumble, which he could then use to attempt to start a grapple.  Are you suggesting that tumbling leaves you open/vulnerable, compared to just casually walking away from an opponent?  Why does anyone bother ot tumble at all, then?  Walk away, get stabbed for a few damage.  Try to tumble, and your arm's getting broken. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f635.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt="O_o" title="Er... what?    O_o"  data-smilie="12"data-shortname="O_o" />And again, BAB alone does not measure martial prowess that well.  Lots of big, dumb, bumbling things have a lot of BAB for their CR.  Some sort of BAB : HD ratio would do a better job, but would be hard to represent as some sort of mathematic +/- to tumble DC.  Could say that medium BAB = +0 DC modifier, full BAB = +x, and poor BAB = -x, but multiclassing mucks that up.</blockquote>

Verification