Surfdragon's page

Just playtested Tumble DC = 15+ BAB and it worked perfectly. Very balanced. At 6th level, the only PCs using it were the Rogue and Ranger/archer, it was just too hard for any of the non-dex characters, but not too hard to keep the Rogue and Ranger from trying it.

Also my monster didn't bother trying to Tumble even though he was a rogue with a decent Acrobatics check, because it was simply too hard to get through multiple opponents. I found that to be nice and realistic.

So DC 15 + BAB is a good solution.

Dennis da Ogre wrote:

So it's just as easy for a wizard with an 8 strength and 10 dex to get a swing in with his staff as a like leveled martial character? I can buy 15+BAB but basing it on HD is just wonky.

I think both are wonky. I preferred the flat DC. They were high enough to keep characters investing in it for most of their careers if they wanted it to be a significant part of their tactical arsenal. Plus, I saw the ability to be on your guard enough to not present a free attack while moving was more of an internal issue rather than one so easily affected by your opponent.

My preference would have been to introduce a couple of tumble-foiling feats like the sort PF introduced for fighters to make casting defensively around them more difficult (like Disruptive).

Both true. Even when it was a single DC of 15, characters rarely put enough skill points in Tumble to make it effects. Generally just the Rogue. So it was never abused in 3.5, until PRGP combined it with Acrobatics.

DC 15 + BAB of the opponent sounds like a good approach.
This makes it potentially way more difficult than 3.5E but offsets the fact that tumble is no longer a separate skill. And it's simple.

There is one big point that everyone is missing:

Tumbling is not a Combat Maneuver.

also
Tumbling is NOT done to avoid an attack, it is done to avoid provoking Attack of Opportunity while moving through a threatened space. So no "fists are flying" as one fellow posted. It's similar to a spell caster rolling a concentration check to avoid and Attack of Opportunity in a threatened space.

What's the solution? Who knows, but I'm the kind of DM who likes combat to seem as realistic as possible, and very role-playable. If things don't make physical sense, then it wasn't well thought out. CMD does not apply to tumbling as written... it was just a convenient solution that wasn't play tested.

DC 15 + the HD of the opponent will have to do for now.

The Tumble ability under the Acrobatics skill has be wrecked by the new rules. In the Beta they made it more difficult by making it a DC 15 + the defending creature's HD to move through a threatened space.
But now a tumbler must beat the "Opponent’s Combat Maneuver Defense".

The problem is that:
CMD = 10 + Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + Dexterity modifier + special size modifier

Which means that for some reason it's almost impossible for a super nimble halfling rogue to tumble past and elephant (CMD = 30)!!!

The bigger a creature is the higher the CMD.
And a creature's strength modifier is added to CMD.

That's all great, but it should have nothing to do with the Acrobatics tumble check. Strong, slow, lumbering, huge beasts cannot be tumbled around, which is the opposite what is supposed to happen.

BROKEN GUYS!!

There should also be brownies and leprechauns.

Sam

I agree!! More Fey creatures would be great. Fey adventures are fantastic and a good reason to spend gold on that cold-iron

The rules for Stealth say you can create "a Diversion to Hide"

Creating a Diversion to Hide: You can use Bluff to allow
you to use Stealth. A successful Bluff check can give you
the momentary diversion you need to attempt a Stealth
check while people are aware of you.

This is NOT a feint. But there is no mention of this in the Bluff listing.

This needs clarification because we need to know what type action this kind of Bluff is. It only says "momentary diversion". Is it a full round, standard, move, or is it part of a move action. How does it work?

For now I'm going to play it like a "feint" so it would be a standard action, but is doesn't say that anywhere in the rules.

It could be a free action but you also have to take a move action to hide. And I doubt you could hide in the same spot you once were or need to move towards cover.

Exactly... This needs to be clarified.