How to stop Tumblers?

[Darklone]

On a side note, in six years of playing 3e, I've seen two tumble checks made in combat. Does this actually come up in anyone's game?

A lot. I had a huge group where most PCs were ftr/rog or bbn/rog or similar builds... they loved to tumble through the reach of bigger creatures and enjoyed their greataxe/greatsword sneak attacks.

Hong, that dialogue seems to happen everytime after someone casts Grease in my groups...

 

[KarinsDad]

Don't you remember the good old example how a high level ranger can track a wizard inside a dungeon without any problems? Wizard BBEG flees through a door, the hallway beyong has 20 doors. Ranger rolls one check and knows where the BBEG went.

That's pretty much beyong normal human capability.

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.

 

[KarinsDad]

You require opposed rolls to move? I can move, or even double move within combat with absolute certainty, so long as I stay out of reach of course.

There's the point right there I think. Tumble is just movement. Specialized movement yes, but still movement. You are not affecting anyone else, just moving. It allows you to move through a threatened square without provoking. It also allows you to move through an occupied square. That's it. It's not helping you in any other way. You gain no bonuses to attack or damage. No one else is actually affected in any way by your use of this skill.

Not quite accurate.

RFN

PC Rogue, PC Fighter, NPC

Rogue moves through Fighter's square, Rogue Tumbles Through NPC's square, Rogue now flanks NPC and gets Sneak Attack damage.

FNR

The reason AoOs were introduced into the game is because movement has consequences.

 

[phindar]

There's the point right there I think. Tumble is just movement. Specialized movement yes, but still movement. You are not affecting anyone else, just moving. It allows you to move through a threatened square without provoking. It also allows you to move through an occupied square. That's it. It's not helping you in any other way. You gain no bonuses to attack or damage. No one else is actually affected in any way by your use of this skill.

I'm not arguing what the skill does, only that opposed rolls are better for handling it than set DCs. I think the skill of the person you are tumbling by/over/through will have something to do with how difficult it is to so; that a high skilled opponent is harder to somersault past than a low skilled opponent. And an opposed roll is a better way of representing that in the game than a set DC.

Also, keep in mind that my group specializes in the lower power level games, 1st-10th level. And for the bulk of those levels (say 7th and below), Opposed Rolls on Tumble checks work in the tumbler's favor most of the time. I don't like OR's because they make tumbling any easier or more difficult, I like them because I think they make more sense. (Granted, thats not always the best yardstick to use in D&D, but in this case it was a fairly painless fix.)

 

[KarinsDad]

On a side note, in six years of playing 3e, I've seen two tumble checks made in combat. Does this actually come up in anyone's game?

Virtually every PC Wizard, Sorcerer, and Psion (and other arcane caster / pure psionic types) in our games take a few ranks of Tumble. Most bump it up every 3 to 5 levels as well (especially Wizards and Psions who can more easily afford the skill points).

And of course, our Rogues, Bards, Monks, Scouts, etc.

That's about half of our PCs. Course, most of our PCs have some form of special abilities, either spells or psionics, since these abilities are what gives PCs an edge in combat.

The casters and manifesters tend to not use it that often, but they use it almost every time they have to get away from multiple enemies (or an enemy with reach) at low level.

If one moves away and then casts, it is an automatic AoO. If one tumbles away and then casts, it tends to be about a +/- 50/50 chance of getting AoOed. For 2 skill points, that is definitely worth the cost.

And unlike Concentration at low level, the 50/50 chance results in getting hit, it does not result in losing the spell and the round of action. Actions are important. Granted, at higher level, Concentration becomes so good that Cast Defensively takes the place of Tumble.

The Rogue and Monk type PCs tend to use it nearly every combat.

 

[Nail]

I'm not arguing what the skill does, only that opposed rolls are better for handling it than set DCs.

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

What's the opposed check for doing so?

 

[Nail]

Virtually every PC Wizard, Sorcerer, and Psion (and other arcane caster / pure psionic types) in our games take a few ranks of Tumble. Most bump it up every 3 to 5 levels as well (especially Wizards and Psions who can more easily afford the skill points)..

"A few" ranks of tumble is enough?

Generally speaking, the "5-foot step" does the "avoid the AoO" thing pretty well. Should there be an opposed roll for that? Really, if you think about it, it's no fair that you can 5-ft step away from a 1st level commoner just as easily as from a 20th level Fighter......

 

[Slaved]

So? KD is only talking about a 2nd level character, hardly a high-powered example that is claimed is required to make use of the ability.

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.

 

[Artoomis]

Leave it be.

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

 

[phindar]

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

What's the opposed check for doing so?

Okay, well, if you take into account that the chasm is static, does not resist, can't move, and is in all ways just there, its the set DC for the Jump check. (DC 5 with a running start, if memory serves). In fact, that is a glorious example of a Set DC. Its not for the Tumble skill, but that's easy enough to come up with. Tumbling out of Falling Damage is a good example of a Set DC, falling 10' is always 10'. (You can tack on circumstance penalties and bonuses, for the times you are landing on jagged rocks or are in a reduced gravity environment, but its still 10')

If a chasm (which only moves in the geological sense, when acted upon by something like erosion) and a guy with a sword who is watching you cartwheel by him presents no difference to you, then I guess I see why you'd want to use set DCs for both. I'm looking at it from a different angle. I'm thinking the guy doesn't want you to tumble past him, and as he has a sword and can move, what he does will have some bearing on how good of a tumbler you need to be to get by him. How good he is at stopping you will determine how good you need to be to get by him.

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

Funny you should mention that. AU, which is where I got the opposed check for tumbling, also makes casting defensively an opposed roll. I like the way that works too. I think the skill of your opponent should affect how difficult it is to not provoke the AoO's, and I think the opposed roll is a much more sensible way of determining that than set DCs.