[Poll] Tumbling?

[Poll] Is this Better Tumbling?

  • Yes! It scales with level, and Fighters would be the best at it!

    Votes: 14 30.4%
  • No! DC:15 is better!

    Votes: 23 50.0%
  • Bleh! They're both about the same!

    Votes: 3 6.5%
  • Ah, I prefer my own idea...

    Votes: 6 13.0%

  • Poll closed .

Steverooo

First Post
Instead of a straight DC:15 Tumbling check allowing skilled Tumblers to bypass opponents without suffering Attacks of Oppurtunity, would opposing the "To-Hit" roll of the attacker (BAB + STR + Enhancement Bonus + whatever + 1D20) be better?

  • Yes! It scales with level, and Fighters would be the best!
  • No! That's worse than DC:15!
  • Bleh! They're both about the same!
  • Ah, I prefer my own idea...
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I voted no, DC 15 is better.

I hate how easy it is for rogues to Tumble so I am thinking of adding the base BAB to the DC, but have not decided to make the change because it might slow down combat.
 





I think the "DC 15" (or 3.0 D&D) version makes tumbling too strong, and the "opposed attack roll" (or Monte Cook) version isn't appealing in that it, in effect, makes Tumble just another form of AC that applies to attacks of opportunity and has almost nothing to do with your action AC. It's also true that it's often the case that opponent's attack bonuses will outstrip tumbling bonuses, which might make tumbling too weak.

Instead, I go for a happy medium. My system is motivated on the following underlying assumption: tumbling through a threatened area should make you better at avoiding attacks of opportunity that your movement provokes. To me, "better at avoiding attacks" is most simply and effectively represented with AC bonuses. Since my system can provide very large bonuses to AC, tumbling continues to be useful, but you need to be very good at tumbling if you want to avoid attacks of opportunity from foes who would normally hit you most of the time (which, I think, is the way it should be). It also retains the value of the Mobility feat for tumbling characters, which I think is a good thing to do. But without further ado:

a. When tumbling through a threatened area, you get a circumstance modifier to your AC versus any attacks of opportunity provoked by your movement equal to (half your skill check) - 5. (Tumbling really ineptly actually makes you easier to hit, as you're paying less attention to dodging). Thus, a skill check result of 19 gives me a +4 AC versus attacks of opportunity.

b. Tumbling through an occupied space works the same way, but the circumstance modifier to AC becomes (half your skill check) - 8. Thus, a skill check result of 19 gives me a +1 AC bonus in this case. Characters always threaten the space they occupy, even if they don't threaten adjacent spaces (if they're wielding a reach weapon or a ranged weapon). If you don't threaten an adjacent space with your weapon, you make your attack of opportunity with an unarmed strike or other natural weapon. If the attack of opportunity hits, my move action ends immediately, in the square I can through just before I tried to tumble through the occupied space.
 

I voted for option one, although I use the tumbling rules from Monte's AU -- opponent's attack roll sets the DC, and if you blow the tumble check they can take the AoO and roll again, this time to hit. Very similar, but also slightly different.
 


Right now it's just way too easy for a cornered rogue to go tumbling around rows of bad guys to escape. All of them have to ready an action in order to stop him, so I definitely want something that is opposed.

I like the DC=attack roll by opponent idea, and hope to see it used sometime. Even a second level rogue can manage to get her tumble skill high enough that failing would be nigh impossible with exception of an occasional 1. Apparently WotC has had many rogue playtesters use this along with flanking and sneak attack.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top