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="Hawken" data-source="post: 4819185" data-attributes="member: 23619">Because you don't need to be trained in tumble to stop a tumble. All you have to do is know when or what to put something in their way and their tumble either stops or moves away from you. And considering the Hill Giant's reach, he's not going to be too worried about an AoO from anything other than another giant. You don't need to have a high Bluff score to not fall for a Bluff. You don't even need a high Sense Motive, if you don't want to believe something, you don't have to believe it. You don't have to have a high Move Silently to stop someone else from moving silently. You don't need ranks in Survival to stop someone from surviving.Same principal.Of course its an expense. Spending anything on anything else is a cost. However, your premise is wrong in that BAB and levelling up are 'free'. Levelling up is a greater expense. There's more involved in levelling up than in improving a skill. However, I will state again, as I have before, that I do not advocate using anything but a skill to oppose a skill. BAB could be a modifier involved in a skill check, but I would never use BAB itself to oppose a skill check.I could definitely see using Tumble to oppose an attempted Tumble check. That totally does make sense. But I do not see it as the only skill to oppose a tumble check. It is if you are trying to move through someone's space. Sorry for not specifying the difference between moving through and past someone.If you want 100% success, then don't bother with tumble and just get Spring Attack. On the other hand, if the pathetic 15/25 DC is modified by the person you're attempting to tumble past, so what? That's a reason to build up tumble, to be better than others. Otherwise, there's not really any point in working up tumble past level 5 or so. The tumbler doesn't need to since he's already started his tumble. I suggested the tumblee get the initiative modifier to see if he can react to tumble in time. If you see it as a complication, that's too bad. Its really a simple concept adding a single modifier in, but then, you don't seem too pleased with my suggestions, so it doesn't matter, does it?3rd level rogue with 18 or 20 Dex, 6 ranks, +2 synergy and we'll go ahead and say skill focus tumble. That gives a 15 or 16 depending on the exact Dex modifier, which at 2nd or 3rd level is an auto success against DC 15, and you have a 50% chance of success against the DC 25 check. At 2nd level! At 1st, if you want to spend 2 feats on skill focus and greater skill focus. And a 1st level character being able to tumble around the Tarrasque or Asmodeus is pretty damn broken!So, your justification for the auto-tumble is because they are going to get their butt kicked anyway? That's stupid! That's like saying I should have super speed so once I get into a car accident and break my back, I won't have to spend as much time walking! You don't give someone a special ability (and an auto-success at a skill is pretty much that) just because of a perceived deficiency. Also, I think you're in the minority thinking that rogues and monks are punks (rhyme unintended). I've seen fellow players craft some wicked rogues and some brutal monks far more than I've seen those classes get abused just because of their class.Actually, the pirate one was about the only one I missed. And like I said before, I used it as an example to make an earlier point. As I mentioned, I used the ninja thing as an analogy to your point. You were stating that only a tumbler should be able to stop a tumbler. I compared it to that cheesy line from old martial arts movies "only a ninja can stop a ninja", which is about as cheesy as your point that only a skilled tumbler can stop someone else from tumbling. And how exactly is the CR guy going to use an AoO to counter the tumble attempt? What AoO is he going to use because tumbling doesn't draw an AoO and for the CR guy to use an AoO attempt, the tumble check has to be made and failed, which won't happen after 2nd or 3rd level as has already been established. How is the CR getting 'back' an AoO? If the tumble is successful, the movement doesn't draw an AoO, so where is the CR guy getting his AoO from? And how does he 'expend' an AoO. There is no AoO to expend. The tumbler doesn't provoke one unless his check fails. They aren't something that gets saved up. An AoO is provoked and the attack is either made on the spot or not. Here's how it works:#1: Tumbler moves through threatened/occupied area(s). This action would normally provoke an AoO. #2: As part of his movement, the Tumbler tumbles to avoid provoking an AoO for his movement. So, he makes a tumble check against DC 15 or 25. If successful, no AoO is provoked. If he fails, AoO is provoked, but by then, the tumble has already been completed as the character has suffered the consequences of his tumble attempt.What you're trying to say is either:#1: The tumbler provokes an AoO for attempting a tumble skill check instead of his movement provoking the AoO or...#2: The CR guy gets to make an AoO for the tumbler moving whether or not the tumbler successfully makes his tumble check and if the CR guy hits, then he gets another AoO for the movement that normally would have provoked an AoO.Why shouldn't a fighter be more difficult to tumble past than a farmer? Really? You don't see why? You're pulling my leg! I refuse to believe you or anyone not retarded would be unable to understand why a fighter trying to kill you would be harder to flip past than a farmer. Being an experienced warrior (or any other class) means that you are used to controlling or at least affecting the area around you (hence the 'experience'). What about combat reflexes makes you think they should 'control' the area around them enough to make AoOs where they are not provoked. All the feat does is let you make more than 1 AoO per round. If you're going to extrapolate the ability to make AoO basically at will, I'd almost be interested to see what modifications you have with other feats.Why are you focusing on fighters? A frickin 20th level wizard wouldn't be easy to tumble past. A DC 15 to move past someone like that. No way.You're not talking about doing superhuman things after a while, you're wanting to do it right off the bat! You need to take a closer look at the skill. If you make a skill check, you performed the technique needed to succeed at your skill. Your technique can be flawless, but that doesn't mean its going to work against someone capable of and able to kill you or knock you down in a single hit. The tumble DC as written allows for no variation, no exception, no allowance for difficulty or challenge and that is what is broken about that aspect of the tumble skill. Every other skill check acting against another character (except for Diplomacy) is an opposed check. And don't even start on diplomacy, there are plenty of threads out there about how broken that is. If a skill is acting on someone else, it should be an opposed roll, or there should be modifiers to the DC to account for who you are acting against. So what about the mage doing that? That's not acting on or against the person he's trying to get around. The rogue (and anyone else) can get to a point where they can reliably get past someone. Its called the Spring Attack feat. If you don't want the rogue to have that, then the rogue should have to build up his tumble skill to account for more dangerous and difficult beings to tumble past, not just dump enough points into it so that by 5th or 6th level, at his laziest, he doesn't even need to roll anymore.</blockquote>

Verification