Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Million Dollar TTRPG Crowdfunders
Most Anticipated Tabletop RPGs Of The Year
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
New Tumbling Rule, Is it Fair???
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 3593594" data-attributes="member: 51942"><p>I agree that the DC needn't be much higher than as is. However, it's not true that a +1 tumble skill is as valuable as a +1 BAB. skills tend to have far lower impact in battle than bab, and essentially, full-bab progression of the fighter as opposed to the 3/4 bab progression of the rogue is probably worth about the entire skill point difference and then some (judging by the UA variant which allows a fighter to give up his feats in return for sneak attack, I'm not alone in this). That would mean that 1 bab every four levels is worth 6 skill points per level ;-) Quite something eh?</p><p></p><p>The above is of course taken completely out of context and not meant to be taken entirely seriously; however 1 rank in tumble _should_ be much worse than 1 bab. More annoyingly, I think that tumble should reflect the type of opponent. Tumbling past a stationary ooze should be easier than past a lighting fast... something ;-). In my games I've used a tumble DC of based on the reflex save bonus of the opponent you're tumbling past instead of a fixed 15. Although this scales, it scales slowly, and mostly, it means you can easily tumble past slow fighters and not past other fast rogues.</p><p></p><p>Currently I don't use the rule because I think it adds pointless complexity.</p><p></p><p>Finally, it's not true that there's no incentive for the rogue to continue putting ranks into tumble by the way; you have only tumble at half speed through threatened spaces at a DC of 15. Tumbling through an opponents square is DC 25, and going full speed is worth a +10 on the DC. And if you move through multiple squares it rises even further.... So your rogue has a bunch of room for character development. Finally, in my campaign I allow a feat (specifically for rogues and monks) that add's a +1 dodge bonus to your AC (while not flatfooted) up to your armor's max dex for each 5 ranks you have in tumble. This aids characters not usually very interesting otherwise, namely monks and rogues. I've still never seen a powerful rogue or monk, let alone an annoyingly powerful monk who is powerful because of this feat, so I'm pretty sure it's OK.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="eamon, post: 3593594, member: 51942"] I agree that the DC needn't be much higher than as is. However, it's not true that a +1 tumble skill is as valuable as a +1 BAB. skills tend to have far lower impact in battle than bab, and essentially, full-bab progression of the fighter as opposed to the 3/4 bab progression of the rogue is probably worth about the entire skill point difference and then some (judging by the UA variant which allows a fighter to give up his feats in return for sneak attack, I'm not alone in this). That would mean that 1 bab every four levels is worth 6 skill points per level ;-) Quite something eh? The above is of course taken completely out of context and not meant to be taken entirely seriously; however 1 rank in tumble _should_ be much worse than 1 bab. More annoyingly, I think that tumble should reflect the type of opponent. Tumbling past a stationary ooze should be easier than past a lighting fast... something ;-). In my games I've used a tumble DC of based on the reflex save bonus of the opponent you're tumbling past instead of a fixed 15. Although this scales, it scales slowly, and mostly, it means you can easily tumble past slow fighters and not past other fast rogues. Currently I don't use the rule because I think it adds pointless complexity. Finally, it's not true that there's no incentive for the rogue to continue putting ranks into tumble by the way; you have only tumble at half speed through threatened spaces at a DC of 15. Tumbling through an opponents square is DC 25, and going full speed is worth a +10 on the DC. And if you move through multiple squares it rises even further.... So your rogue has a bunch of room for character development. Finally, in my campaign I allow a feat (specifically for rogues and monks) that add's a +1 dodge bonus to your AC (while not flatfooted) up to your armor's max dex for each 5 ranks you have in tumble. This aids characters not usually very interesting otherwise, namely monks and rogues. I've still never seen a powerful rogue or monk, let alone an annoyingly powerful monk who is powerful because of this feat, so I'm pretty sure it's OK. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
New Tumbling Rule, Is it Fair???
Top