How to stop Tumblers?

[KarinsDad]

I'd like to jump over a 5 foot wide chasm.

What's the opposed check for doing so?

Is there a creature standing in the middle of the chasm and in your way when you try to do that?

 

[Fifth Element]

Agreed. I did not say that skills could not go beyond normal human capability.

I said that this sidebar itself did not indicate that skills could go beyond human capability.

That's literally true. But if that was your only point with that statement, what was the point of the statement? If you're only pointing out that the sidebar itself does not indicate that skills can go beyond normal human capacity (while agreeing that the rules in general are intended this way), then the post is meaningless (and gives the impression that you're picking nits and splitting hairs to boot). Therefore, it was reasonable for others to assume you were arguing that skills should not go beyond human capacity, because otherwise your statement is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[Nail]

I'm thinking the guy doesn't want you to tumble past him,...

Which is, as has been pointed out, completely irrelevant. What "the guy" wants or does not want has nothing to do with provoking AoOs.




An Example: An orc stands next to an armed Ftr, and moves 15 feet to attack someone else. The Ftr gains an AoO.

Why is this not an Opposed check? Why not use BAB or some such thing (as you've been proposing for tumble)? Surely the orc doesn't want to be the subject of an AoO? And surely - or so you have been arguing - a less skilled fighter should have less of a chance to take an AoO.....

Etc.

 

[DungeonMaester]

Use Inits out of combat.

Its a quick fix to the ready actions out of combat. Of course, it helps if they get good rolls though....

---Rusty

 

[KarinsDad]

Which is, as has been pointed out, completely irrelevant. What "the guy" wants or does not want has nothing to do with provoking AoOs.

Only in the current descriptive text of what AoOs represent.


In the reason for the AoO rules in the first place position, AoOs are a game balance mechanic.

As such, an AoO opposed roll is a perfectly reasonable game mechanic solution to the problems they were originally trying to solve:

1) Spell casters casting spells and there being no reasonable way (readying is not reasonable) for an opponent standing next to him to attempt to stop the spell.

2) Archers firing arrows, still being totally defensive, and there being no reasonable way for an opponent standing next to him to attempt to interfere with the shot.

3) In a circular initiative system, an ability to react to moving targets as they try to get to or past an area and the defender trying to prevent them from doing so or taking advantage of them doing so.

AoOs are not a perfect solution for any of these perceived problems (all of them caused by a segmented circular initiative system), but they are a good first step (better than any 1E or 2E solution).


If WotC had originally set up the avoidance of AoOs as an opposed roll instead of a roll versus a set DC, I suspect strongly that many people on the pro-DC side would be on the pro-opposed roll side, just because that is what they had done for years and because that solution would have been adequately explained by WotC when 3E first came out. Dropping the extra die roll would not be that big of a deal.


When 3E first came out, there was no Immediate Actions. Now there are. Does that mean that the way Feather Fall was handled in 3E was the best way, or an inferior way? Breaking people out of their current mode of thinking is a difficult thing. Now, we have all types of new techniques in the game.

When 4E comes out, if opposed rolls to avoid an AoO (instead of a set DC) were to be introduced, some people might grumble about it for a while and eventually it would become part of our gaming culture and most people would forget about it.

Your "irrelevant" of today Nail might become the "relevant" of tomorrow.

 

[Nail]

Your "irrelevant" of today Nail might become the "relevant" of tomorrow.

True enough! (...and I *am* just a bit curious about 4e....)

I've found (IME) that more rolls during combats make for slower combats...which make for less fun all around.

YMMV.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

Ok, so if tumble is too good because it is not an opposed roll, let’s make a new skill that is used for the opposed roll. It will just be like spot and hide. congrads, now a fighter type must spend more skills so the tumblers are not stronger then they already are. If you give the oposed roll based on bab, your making umble useless because as a skill your putting ranks it in just to keep up, not to get better at it, while likewise if their was a counter tumble skill, thier would be even more complaints because it every fighter would take it because if they didn’t, their would be no way to counter the tumble.

Tumble is fine as is. If opposed rolls join the game, tumble should be taken out, and its replacement should be just a dex vs strength or something.

 

[Darklone]

Leave it be.

It is no worse than Cast Defensively which, with enough ranks in Concentration, becomes automatic in avoiding AoOs.

Agreed.

Btw, most of my chars had a better level 2 tumbling score than 11.

Sheesh, I should try other races now and then.

 

[KarinsDad]

True enough! (...and I *am* just a bit curious about 4e....)

I've found (IME) that more rolls during combats make for slower combats...which make for less fun all around.

I think opposed skill rolls can slow it up a bit, but no more than opposed Strength checks for Trip, Overrun, etc.

The player is rolling just like always. It is just that the DM is also rolling a D20 to find out who rolls higher.

And at least in our games, opposed rolls are sometimes (but not always) faster to discern the result.

If one character rolls an 8 or less and the other a 13 or greater or some such, typically the one who rolled a 13+ wins (unless his bonus differential is significant). Another common occurance is that one character has a much larger skill total and rolling the dice is mostly a formality. If the character with the lower skill total doesn't roll high and the character with the higher skill total doesn't roll low, it's not even worth the time to add the skill to the die (which also takes time). So, opposed rolls can sometimes be faster than DC rolls.

 

[Legildur]

The "so" part would be that his statement was only correct in a very limited circumstance. A circumstance that most of the time would have many other options besides tumble to accomplish the same goal. Such as simply walking around the guy outside of his threat area.

If you make it more into a game situation where it will be important the DC is likely to be higher. He did not try to put it into a game situation nor did he give the large number of limitations involved, he simply brushed them away in order to make his claims seem more justified. Hopefully I fixed that in some little way.

Okay, I'll present a scenario on movement in threatened area. The 2nd level rogue example can tumble without provoking an AOO 85% time past a commoner or an ancient red dragon - one of these is obviously a more effective combatant than the other, yet there is no difference in success or outcomes. Then let's take a 20th level fighter with Dex 10 and no ranks in Tumble. He uses his entire round of movement to carefully move 10ft past the same dragon - bang! The dragon gets an AOO even though the fighting prowess of the fighter far surpasses that of the young rogue.