Tumble and Charge

[mvincent]

I am confident a being with a climb speed can charge while climbing as long as it follows the direct and clear path part of charging.

But could it combine movement modes during a withdraw? i.e. since the rules say climbing "may be combined with other types of movement in a move action"... but makes no mention of other types of actions involving movement.

 

[frankthedm]

But could it combine movement modes during a withdraw? i.e. since the rules say climbing "may be combined with other types of movement in a move action"... but makes no mention of other types of actions involving movement.

Now are you refering to the issue of changing movement modes mid movement? Because i will swiftly admit the rules are hazy there. But you definly cannot use a form of movement for which you don’t have a listed speed during a withdraw. So lit looks like it is withdraw or tumble.

Withdraw
Withdrawing from melee combat is a full-round action. When you withdraw, you can move up to double your speed. The square you start out in is not considered threatened by any opponent you can see, and therefore visible enemies do not get attacks of opportunity against you when you move from that square. (Invisible enemies still get attacks of opportunity against you, and you can’t withdraw from combat if you’re blinded.) You can’t take a 5-foot step during the same round in which you withdraw.

If, during the process of withdrawing, you move out of a threatened square (other than the one you started in), enemies get attacks of opportunity as normal.

You may not withdraw using a form of movement for which you don’t have a listed speed.

Note that despite the name of this action, you don’t actually have to leave combat entirely.

 

[starwed]

Logic

Tumbling is part of movement, so a Tumble check is part of a move action.

This statement, which many are basing their view on, is nonsensical. The implied syllogism is something like this:

[b]Major premise:[/b] All movement is part of a move action.
[b]Minor premise:[/b] Tumbling is part of movement.
[b]Conclusion:[/b]    Tumbling is part of a move action.

But the first premise is incorrect. So I'm leary of using it as the definitive rule, when it's not even a sound statement. If there is a clarifying 3.5 FAQ answer, I'd defer to that.

 

[pawsplay]

Charging allows you to move; while it does not grant you a move action, specfically, it does not use a unique definition of move.

Jumping is allowed because it's not disallowed. Tumbling, however, is disallowed by the hampered movement rule; whether or not you use accelerated movement, tumbling clearly slows or hinders you. Climbing, ditto.

It's kind of a muddle, but I think that's basically where things are.

 

[starwed]

Tumbling, however, is disallowed by the hampered movement rule; whether or not you use accelerated movement, tumbling clearly slows or hinders you.

That's a good ruling, and I'd then allow Acrobatic Charge to enable tumbling.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Tumbling, however, is disallowed by the hampered movement rule; whether or not you use accelerated movement, tumbling clearly slows or hinders you.

How does Tumble slow or hinder you if you use accelerated movement?

Jumping is allowed because it's not disallowed.

But if Jumping is part of a move action, and charging is not a move action, how does that evaluate to "it's not disallowed"?

-Hyp.

 

[pawsplay]

How does Tumble slow or hinder you if you use accelerated movement?

Avoiding attack of opportunity is a hindrance. Accelerated movement is a means of compensating for that hindrance, but you are still making hindered movement. I know it's a fine point, but I have no trouble seeing it that way.

But if Jumping is part of a move action, and charging is not a move action, how does that evaluate to "it's not disallowed"?

Moving is also part of a move action, and it's not disallowed during a charge. Although a charge does not specify a "move action," it is a standard movement and invokes no special definitions.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Avoiding attack of opportunity is a hindrance.

The attack of opportunity is a hindrance. Avoiding the attack of opportunity is removing that hindrance.

Moving is also part of a move action, and it's not disallowed during a charge.

Indeed, it's specifically required.

Moving can be part of a move action, a Charge action, a Withdraw action, a Run action, etc.

Jumping is part of a move action.

Although a charge does not specify a "move action," it is a standard movement and invokes no special definitions.

Right. But 'movement' isn't the only thing specified in the Jump text; 'it is part of a move action' is also specified. Charge includes movement, but there is no move action for the Jump to be part of contained within it.

-Hyp.

 

[tomBitonti]

AOO as Hindrance

The attack of opportunity is a hindrance. Avoiding the attack of opportunity is removing that hindrance.
-Hyp.

I don't think that is true -- with respect to charges. Otherwise, any charge
movement that actually draws an attack-of-opportunity would cancel the charge.
Here "hindrance" must be taken as "hindrance to movement", and weaving about
to avoid an AOO definitely seems to be that.

 

[mvincent]

I think one of the points we're hung up on is (from the tumbling description):
"Action
Not applicable. Tumbling is part of movement, so a Tumble check is part of a move action."

Some people believe that means you have to use a move action in order to use tumbling. I don't believe that is the case since (for example) you can use tumbling to "Treat a fall as if it were 10 feet shorter than it really is when determining damage."... and one often falls when it is not their turn (and/or they are not taking a move action). i.e. if you fall while withdrawing, you should still be able to use tumbling to lessen the fall.

As for accelarated tumbling hindering movement: that is subject to interpretation (so I could see some DM's making that call), but I believe that the term "hindered movement" was intended more in the strict, mechanical sense (rather than the abstract). Mechanically speaking, if your movement isn't reduced, you're not really hindered. Ruling otherwise doesn't seem completely fair.