D&D 3E/3.5 Please Confirm 3.5e Tumble

[DrSpunj]

According to the Paizo DM Screen in Dragon #310 (which I just received today) Tumble is on PHB page 84 and has the following tasks:

* Treat a fall as if it were 10' shorter than it really is when determining damage. (DC 15)

* Tumble at one-half speed as part of normal movement, provoking no attacks of opportunity while doing so. Failure means you provoke attacks of opportunity normally. Check separately for each opponent you move past, in the order in which you pass them (player's choice in case of a tie). Each additional enemy after the first adds +2 to the Tumble DC. (DC 15)

* Tumble at one-half speed through an area occupied by an enemy (over, under, or around the opponent) as part of normal movement, provoking no attacks of opportunity while doing so. Failure means you stop before entering the enemy-occupied area and provoke an attack of opportunity normally. Check separately for each opponent you move past, in the order in which you pass them (player's choice in case of a tie). Each additional enemy after the first adds +2 to the Tumble DC. (DC 25)

Surface Modifiers:
Lightly obstructed (scree, light rubble, undergrowth), +2 DC
Severely obstructed (cavern floor, rubble, thick undergrowth), +5 DC
Lightly slippery (wet floor), +2 DC
Severely slippery (ice sheet), +5 DC
Sloped or angled, +2 DC


Now, several comments:

1) Since I don't have my new PHB yet, can anyone confirm that this is in fact the version of Tumble that made it into 3.5e?

2) Sorry if I missed this being posted and/or discussed before now. I tried Searching the General and Rules forums over the last week for anything with "3.5*" and "Tumble" but kept coming up empty! (Is the Search function working okay? It didn't take it too long and I was asking it to look through the threads, not just the titles.)

3) While it's not an opposed roll, it does address a few things that have cropped up in the various "Tumble is broken" threads around here, namely that it is harder to Tumble past more than one opponent; and if you can't make the check to go through someone's square without provoking an AoO, you don't actually get through!

4) The movement is no longer a flat "up to 20'" but is now "one-half your movement". I like this since varying base speeds now actually impact one's tumbling distance.

5) Finally, it requires a LOT more die rolls if you're trying to move past even a handful of enemies. While this may make things more realistic, it lengthens the game and will probably make most tumblers think twice (or even three times) about tumbling through a group of enemies. I think I'll have to see it in play before I make up my mind whether overall it's a good or bad thing.

Thoughts?

 

[Tellerve]

Yep, that looks like how it is in my book. And for the most part I really like it, and while I agree with the fact there are more rolls, I don't know how it'll play out. I say I'm fine with it but I haven't played with it. I've played with people that are really slow and only have a to hit roll and damage, and others who are much more "in the game" and faster with their rolls.

Tellerve

 

[the Jester]

Ooh, I like it... especially the bit about stopping in front of an enemy blocking your way if you fail to make your check!

 

[drnuncheon]

One more thing you didn't mention:

If you take a -10 modifier to your roll, you can tumble at your full speed.

J

 

[iwatt]

DrSpunj, your quote says:

Tumble at one-half speed as part of normal movement, provoking no attacks of opportunity while doing so.

You say, and I agree by the way, that:

4) The movement is no longer a flat "up to 20'" but is now "one-half your movement".

I just wanted to add that what I understand from this is that a human rogue (30' base move) can tumble 15' as a move action, or up to 30' as a full-round action.

What I don't understand completely, is the +2 DC for extra opponents. Suppose 3 opponents A, B, C. What is the DC to tumple past each

OPTION (1)
past A -----> DC 15
past B -----> DC 17
past C -----> DC 19

or

Option (2)
past A -----> DC 19
past B -----> DC 19
past C -----> DC 19


By the way, only tumbling "through" carries the penalty of being stopped before entering the area. Failing a tumble "past" only means you get targeted by AoO.

Those are just my two cents.

 

[Tessarael]

Requiring a tumbling roll for each opponent makes it very unlikely you'll get past multiple opponents even if you have good tumbling. It would be better to have one roll.

e.g. You rolled and got a DC of 19 (say skill 7 and roll of 12), so you get past the first, second and third opponents, but get stuck at the fourth opponent.

A single roll makes it much easier to assess your character's chance of success. Multiple rolls make it hard for most of us without a computer to estimate the chance of success.

---

That's also one of the things I dislike about opposed skill checks - if only a single d20 is rolled, I can work out my chance of success easily from the DC, otherwise it's a pain.

I cranked through the analysis for opposed rolls for Hide and Move Silently with some extra skill points vs. having Skill Mastery in those skills and only requiring one roll. Basically, having 3 extra skill points in a skill is better than Skill Mastery without the extra skill points, except if your skill was 10 points or more better than their skill.

Opposed rolls just increases the variability and means you won't automatically make a check unless you're 20 skill points better than them (11 points better than them with Skill Mastery and only one d20 being rolled).

One way of getting rid of opposed rolls would be to use their skill + 10 + x as the required DC. Where x is say 2 or 3 (to mimic the impact Skill Mastery would have).

 

[the Jester]

A single roll makes it much easier to assess your character's chance of success. Multiple rolls make it hard for most of us without a computer to estimate the chance of success.

---

That's also one of the things I dislike about opposed skill checks - if only a single d20 is rolled, I can work out my chance of success easily from the DC, otherwise it's a pain.

Well, keep in mind that your character can't compute his exact chance of success, either. Personally, I don't let spellcasters count squares either.

 

[sithramir]

It would be better to only roll one roll but it would be overly powerful and not by the rules.

A = DC of 15
B= DC of 17
C=DC of 19

You make a roll for each combatent. The idea is that you might get past one easily but the others see whats going on and have an "idea" what you are trying to do so get a bonus.

 

[jaults]

You make a roll for each combatent. The idea is that you might get past one easily but the others see whats going on and have an "idea" what you are trying to do so get a bonus.

    I see what you're saying, but where do you stop if you fail only the third Tumble check? You made Tumble checks one and two, so you should get to move past those opponents. But if the opponents are in a 5' wide corridor, there is no where for you to go.

Jason

 

[Christian]

If there's nothing in the 3.5 PH discussing that situation, I'd treat it like a bull rush situation-you end up prone in the square you were coming from (i.e. the square of the last enemy you successfully tumbled through).