|
The description of Acrobatics doesn't really explain what happens if you fail the check when attempting to move through a square that's threatened or occupied by an enemy. Am I missing something? Are folks falling back to the 3.5 rules on this? (3.5 was explicit that if you try to tumble through a threatened square and fail, you complete your move but provoke an AOO. If you try to tumble through an occupied space and fail, you stop before entering the enemy-occupied area and provoke.) Thanks!
The description of Acrobatics doesn't really explain what happens if you fail the check when attempting to move through a square that's threatened or occupied by an enemy. Am I missing something? Are folks falling back to the 3.5 rules on this? (3.5 was explicit that if you try to tumble through a threatened square and fail, you complete your move but provoke an AOO. If you try to tumble through an occupied space and fail, you stop before entering the enemy-occupied area and provoke.) Thanks!
We continue to use the 3.5 rules for failures.
When they get an FAQ this question needs to go on the first page.
The way I see it.
If you fail to tumble you follow whatever the rules are if you hadn't been tumbling which is:
Through a threatened area -> you provoke an AoO
Through an opponents square -> you cannot pass through an opponents square.
As to the multiple skill checks, I say no. You only roll one Tumble (Acrobatics) check, adjusting the DC for the extra foes you will tumble past.
I cite the Stealth rules as precedent: if you were stealthing past the same foes, you would only roll one stealth roll, and each foe would oppose that one roll with his own perception check.
Ergo, in both cases, one skill being used, one roll being made.
The further reason for this is mathematical. Rolling for each foe dramatically increases the difficulty. Adding +2 DC for each foe also increases the difficulty. Doing both is unneccessarily punishing. Even more, if you are rolling for each foe separately, then there is no logical reason to add the +2 DC - some foe standing 10' away that you haven't even tried to tumble past yet isn't going to make it harder to tumble past the guy right in front of you, and once you're past this guy, having already tumbled past him won't make it harder to tumble past that second guy.
So, for all those reasons, I say stick with the precedent set by other skills, and stick with the interpretation that is not unduly punishing, and stick with the interpretation that doesn't fail a simple logic test.
|
|
I cite the Stealth rules as precedent: if you were stealthing past the same foes, you would only roll one stealth roll, and each foe would oppose that one roll with his own perception check.
Ergo, in both cases, one skill being used, one roll being made.
I don't think they're all that analogous. For example, with Stealth each opponent has a chance to notice you with its Perception skill. When you use Acrobatics to tumble, the opponents don't get any sort of opposed roll. Also, while Move Silently in 3.5 called for only one skill check by the one being sneaky, 3.5 explicitly required one check per enemy when using Tumble to move past multiple foes.
Rolling for each foe dramatically increases the difficulty.
Absolutely, but hey, I have no problem making it tough on PCs to tumble around multiple foes. The choice is theirs: if PCs want to tumble, they know the risk and can gauge the DC themselves.
Most rogue/duelist types of level 5+ can make themselves pretty incredible at Acrobatics, and will be able to tumble past or through more than one enemy, even with the double-jeopardy of the +2 DC and the need for multiple checks. Finally, the downside really isn't that horrendous: you provoke an attack of opportunity. That's not so bad, especially if that rogue/duelist has Mobility and if the foes lack Combat Reflexes.
The problem with the question is, we don't know the situation.
A) Three opponents being tumbled past, and all 3 threaten the same square being passed through.
This would be one roll against all three at the highest DC (Normal DC +4 because of 3 attackers).
B) Three opponents on his line of movement, but they all threaten different squares (no overlap).
This one is three checks, one against each person. I'd increase the DC per check. First at +0, second at +2, third at +4. It get's harder to tumble/bob/weave when you're doing it all along your movement instead of doing it through 5-15 feet instead.
I'm not entirely sure if it's one roll or one for each opponent, it's not entirely clear. Certainly seems like one roll to me the way it's worded but I'd just assumed one per opponent.
I think one roll is ok, considering how much more difficult it is to tumble it makes a lot of sense.
|
Well to make things more interesting, I'd toss the +2 per opponent onto the DC and then compare the results to all of the relevant CMD's to see who gets an Attack of Opportunity.
Never been a huge fan of the all or nothing DC's, s'why I like the ones where failure isn't complete. You know, like climb or the like.
Well to make things more interesting, I'd toss the +2 per opponent onto the DC and then compare the results to all of the relevant CMD's to see who gets an Attack of Opportunity.
I think that's how it works. Of course if you are trying to move through an occupied square you just stop at the first failed square.
Well to make things more interesting, I'd toss the +2 per opponent onto the DC and then compare the results to all of the relevant CMD's to see who gets an Attack of Opportunity.I think that's how it works. Of course if you are trying to move through an occupied square you just stop at the first failed square.
This is a correct observation, but it makes for some very inexplicable corner cases.
Imagine a narrow 5-food wide corridor. The fighter is in front, the cleric is next, and the rogue is behind him. There is a monster in the square in front of the fighter. The rogue decides to tumble past his two allies and then through the monster's square so he can end up behind the monster, flanking him with the fighter (we'll assume he can move that far).
Suppose he fails this tumble check. Where does he stop?
He cannot stop in the fighter's space, and he cannot stop in the cleric's space, so he essentially goes nowhere. We could try to brush this off by saying his cleric buddy accidentally stepped in his way, blocking the entire effort.
But the really weird part is, if the monster has a really low CMD, the rogue will usually have no trouble getting around his cleric friend. But if the monster has a really high CMD, his cleric friend will always seem to be in the worst possible place, accidentally screwing up the rogue's tumble every time.
So, oddly, in this situation, the monsters CMD directly affects the rogue's ability to tumble past the cleric and has no bearing on the rogue's ability to tumble past the monster.
Odd, isn't it?
It is said that he DC is used to avoid the attack of opportunity, so the consequences of a failed check seem obvious.
There is nothing to tell what happens if you tried to pass through an occupied square, but that seems logical to not allow it if the check is failed.
So, oddly, in this situation, the monsters CMD directly affects the rogue's ability to tumble past the cleric and has no bearing on the rogue's ability to tumble past the monster.
Odd, isn't it?
Eh... I suppose. THough you keep saying "tumble past the cleric" when he doesn't need to tumble through the clerics space. It's an interesting corner case but not the weirdest thing in the rules and probably less damaging than the simpler solution which would be bumping the rogue into the fighters square and having them both knocked prone.
As an aside:
You could get even crazier. If the rogue as 1000 enemies behind him in a 5' corridor and 1 in front. If the 1000 behind had a readied action to move forward when the rogue moves and the rogue tried to tumble through the one square but failed he would be shot backwards 5000' down the tunnel, easily breaking the sound barrier in his attempt... likely killing himself and all the intervening enemies. Quite ridiculous...
PS: Wasn't trying to make a point or mock you but for some reason your suggestion planted the image of a rogue failing a tumble and being launched into orbit.
It is said that he DC is used to avoid the attack of opportunity, so the consequences of a failed check seem obvious.
There is nothing to tell what happens if you tried to pass through an occupied square, but that seems logical to not allow it if the check is failed.
Wording in the movement section suggests that success is required to move through an occupied square:
Tumbling: A trained character can attempt to use Acrobatics to move through a square occupied by an opponent (see the Acrobatics skill).
Wording in the movement section suggests that success is required to move through an occupied square:
Tumbling: A trained character can attempt to use Acrobatics to move through a square occupied by an opponent (see the Acrobatics skill).
Indeed, but it's not clear enough, or at least not as clear as in 3.5. But I will rule it that way.
If not, anybody could tumble to automatically pass through a square at a cost of an attack of opportunity.
Related question: can I assume everyone is still requiring a skill check per opponent tumbled past?
In addition, you can move through a threatened square
without provoking an attack of opportunity from an
enemy by using Acrobatics.
Nothing is stated obut DCs or other conditions that would prevent this kind of movement.
Situation Base Acrobatics DC*
Move through a threatened area - Opponent’s Combat
Maneuver Defense
Move through an enemy’s space - 5 + opponent’s Combat
Maneuver Defense
* This DC is used to avoid an attack of opportunity due to
movement. This DC increases by 2 for each additional
opponent avoided in 1 round.
I actually had not taken the time previously to look at the exact wording of this.
The table states that the DC is used to avoid AoO not to complete the move - ergo a failed DC only means that you provoke an AoO it does not in any way imply that your movement is blocked!
Thurther, the table states move through a threatened area or enemy's space - in singular. The implication of this is that you must make a skill check for EVERY threatened or occupied square you wish to move through.
I am so looking forward to the next tumble check the party rogue attempts. ;)
|
|
the table states move through a threatened area or enemy's space - in singular. The implication of this is that you must make a skill check for EVERY threatened or occupied square you wish to move through.
I agree, but that seems maybe too harsh, and maybe involve too many rolls. Often, getting past one enemy means going through multiple threatened squares. Sometimes one square is threatened by multiple foes, but in general I think one check per enemy rather than one check per square is going to be more generous to the PCs.
|
|
The DC of each roll will depend on how many of the opposition threathen the particular square. Example you're tumbling through two threathened squares A and B. If three folks threathen square A, you add the dc for the extra two, if you're tumbling a long distance and square B is threathened by one foe it's the standard DC.
I disagree. The Pathfinder description of Acrobatics provides, "This DC increases by 2 for each additional opponent avoided in 1 round." So even if the opponents threaten different squares, the +2 DC hike stacks.
|
I personally run acrobatics with tumble in two seperate ways.
Firstly tumbling through a creatures threatened square is much easier than going through an opponents square. It uses the rules as presented in the core rulebook with one exception. The DC is set by the first target you potentially threaten. This isnt clearly stated and some people like to take the opponent with the highest CMD instead - i think its fairer to take the first. Second I am considering increasing the DC by +2 per threatened square you travel through. thus the further you tumble the harder it is.
Secondly I run tumbling through a square is a single move action. You must designate a start point and a destination square you intend to tumble through. You must be adjacent to the target and must have enough available movement to reach the target square (you can only move half speed unless you increase the DC by 10). you can tumble through an additional opponents square if they are at least 1 size category smaller than you as long as they are adjacent to the first and you have sufficient space and movement to pass. a successful check moves you to the designated square, failure causes you to become blocked. All modifiers to tumbling through a threatened square apply to tumbling through an opponents space.
If someone wishes to move through an opponents space as part of normal movement I simply inform them they must make a jump check as part of the tumble increasing the DC of the tumble by the jump DC. for example a PC wants to tumble through an ogres threat range and get into a flank possition by passing through its squares. The PC must pass a base DC of 18 (the Ogres CMD) +4 for 2 threaten squares + 10 for a jump distance of 2 squares(the ogres space) for a total DC of 32! without the 10 ft running start the DC would be 40! you dont count a creatures squares as threatened unless another creature threatens those squares too
As an aside:
You could get even crazier. If the rogue as 1000 enemies behind him in a 5' corridor and 1 in front. If the 1000 behind had a readied action to move forward when the rogue moves and the rogue tried to tumble through the one square but failed he would be shot backwards 5000' down the tunnel, easily breaking the sound barrier in his attempt... likely killing himself and all the intervening enemies. Quite ridiculous...PS: Wasn't trying to make a point or mock you but for some reason your suggestion planted the image of a rogue failing a tumble and being launched into orbit.
those 1000 enemies behind would really have to crowd together or it'd have to be a REALLY long tumble to be able to threathen the same target. Under most circumstances only the first couple in line would threathen, of course the suicidal rogue would wind up squeezed and surrounded by foes if for some idiotic reason she was tumbling backward.
Not sure what you mean. I was suggesting that the rogue would only try and tumble past the one in front, but as soon as she starts her tumble the ones behind move forward removing the legal square she was in. So when she fails her tumble she can't move back to where she was because that square is occupied so she would continue moving back to the closest legal square which is 1000 squares behind
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Ok, so let me see if I'm reading this right.
Mikey the monk wants to tumble past Fred the fighter and Roger the Rogue to stab Wally the wizard, who is 20' away.
Scenario #1 there's a 5' square threatened by both Fred and Roger, to get to Wally Fred's CMB is 25, Roger's is 20.
Mikey rolls a 15: He gets to Wally but takes a shot from Fred and Roger.
Mikey rolls a 22: Fred gets a swing, but Roger doesn't.
Mikey rolls a 26: He slips past both defenders and gets to Wally without a scratch.
This is assuming Mikey's speed is base 40. If it was less than that, the DCs would be 10 higher as he'd have to go full tilt. Either way, the only way to stop Mikey would be to trip or otherwise end his movment with the AoA (stand still anyone?)
Now I don't see any language showing that you fail the move through the foe's square.
Scenario #2 10' wide hallway, Fred and Roger are standing shoulder to shoulder blocking Mikey's path. Mikey decides to tumble through Roger's square, raising his DC to 25. Again, Mikey gets through, but if he doesn't roll above a 25, he gets smacked by both of them.
Ok, so let me see if I'm reading this right.
Mikey the monk wants to tumble past Fred the fighter and Roger the Rogue to stab Wally the wizard, who is 20' away.
Scenario #1 there's a 5' square threatened by both Fred and Roger, to get to Wally Fred's CMB is 25, Roger's is 20.
Mikey rolls a 15: He gets to Wally but takes a shot from Fred and Roger.
Mikey rolls a 22: Fred gets a swing, but Roger doesn't.
Mikey rolls a 26: He slips past both defenders and gets to Wally without a scratch.
This is assuming Mikey's speed is base 40. If it was less than that, the DCs would be 10 higher as he'd have to go full tilt. Either way, the only way to stop Mikey would be to trip or otherwise end his movment with the AoA (stand still anyone?)
Now I don't see any language showing that you fail the move through the foe's square.
Scenario #2 10' wide hallway, Fred and Roger are standing shoulder to shoulder blocking Mikey's path. Mikey decides to tumble through Roger's square, raising his DC to 25. Again, Mikey gets through, but if he doesn't roll above a 25, he gets smacked by both of them.
I pretty much agree with this except the last bit about tumbling through an occupied space.
Note that the rules state explicitly that you cannot move through an enemy's space. In order to get through that space, you need some kind of maneuver, either a combat maneuver like Overrun, or some other kind of maneuver, like using Acrobatics to tumble through the space.
Further note that under the rules for tumbling through an occupied space, it says you may use Acrobatics to attempt to tumble through the occupied space. "Attempt" implies success or failure - if the "attempt" fails, you won't get through the space; this is implicit in the meaning of the word "attempt".
So, given the fact that Acrobatics lets you "attempt" to break the basic rule (that you cannot move through an enemy's space), failing this attempt means the basic rule is still in force.
Ergo, failing to tumble through an enemy's space means you are prevented from moving through the enemy's space.
Now you're getting rather silly. At some point you simply have to adjudicate off the cuff in examples where the rules which were designed for small scale skirmishes break down. When things start getting as screwy as suggesting the rogue's legal square is a mile from her present position you might just want to admit that standard rules simply don't make sense for this kind of example.
Umm... yeah, that's why I said "it's quite ridiculous" and said there was really no point to the post. Although I guess it is an illustration of why it's silly to read RAW literally.
Ok, so let me see if I'm reading this right.
Mikey the monk wants to tumble past Fred the fighter and Roger the Rogue to stab Wally the wizard, who is 20' away.
Scenario #1 there's a 5' square threatened by both Fred and Roger, to get to Wally Fred's CMB is 25, Roger's is 20.
Mikey rolls a 15: He gets to Wally but takes a shot from Fred and Roger.
Mikey rolls a 22: Fred gets a swing, but Roger doesn't.
Mikey rolls a 26: He slips past both defenders and gets to Wally without a scratch.
This is assuming Mikey's speed is base 40. If it was less than that, the DCs would be 10 higher as he'd have to go full tilt. Either way, the only way to stop Mikey would be to trip or otherwise end his movment with the AoA (stand still anyone?)
Not quite, almost. There is a +2 modifier to the DC for every additional opponent he has to tumble past. This represents that it's harder to get past two opponents than it would be to get past either one individually. So, the DC for Roger is 22, not 20, and for Fred, it's 27, not 25. So, in your above :
15 : Both get an AoO.
22 : Fred get's an AoO.
26 : Fred get's an AoO.
28 : Nobody get's an AoO.
EDIT: Also, even with 40 feet of movement, he's going to have trouble. Because, more than likely, he has to get through 3 to 5 hexes of threatened area. Not sure I can grid it on the forum, but I'll try.
Scenario 1
__|A_|B_|C_|D_|E_|
1_|__|__|__|__|__|
2_|__|__|W_|__|__|
3_|__|__|__|__|__|
4_|__|R_|__|__|__|
5_|__|__|__|__|__|
6_|__|__|__|F_|__|
7_|__|__|__|__|__|
8_|__|__|M_|__|__|
9_|__|__|__|__|__|
C8 = M = Mikey
D6 = F = Fred Fighter
B4 = R = Roger Rogue
C2 = W = Wally Wizard
If this is the setup, he has to tumble at half-speed through 25 feet, which means he needs 50 feet to get there. Roger threatens C3 to C5, and Fred threatens F5 to F7. You use the highest penalty for Mikey, which is C5 (where Roger and Fred overlap). That would be Fred's 25 + 2 for Roger, and Roger's 20 + 2 for Fred. If he only had 40 feet of movement, he'd have to use full movement, which would boost him up to a 32/37 instead of 22/27.
Scenario 2
__|A_|B_|C_|D_|E_|
1_|__|__|__|__|__|
2_|__|__|W_|__|__|
3_|__|__|__|__|__|
4_|__|R_|__|F_|__|
5_|__|__|__|__|__|
6_|__|__|__|__|__|
7_|__|__|__|__|__|
8_|__|__|H_|__|__|
9_|__|__|__|__|__|
C8 = H = Hero
D4 = F = Fred Fighter
B4 = R = Roger Rogue
C2 = W = Wally Wizard
In this scenario, he only needs 40 feet of movement. However, his target numbers go up assuming Wally threatens (has weapon in his hand, or a touch spell ready to go). C3 is the square with the highest threat rating, as all three threaten it. So the DC (assuming Wally has a 16 CMB) would be : Fred 29 (25 + 4 for Wally & Roger), Roger 24 (20 + 4 for Fred and Wally), and Wally 20 (16 + 4 for Fred and Roger. Note the rule doesn't say 'only people you are passing through' it says '+2 for every ally threatening the square'.
|
The description of Acrobatics doesn't really explain what happens if you fail the check when attempting to move through a square that's threatened or occupied by an enemy. Am I missing something? Are folks falling back to the 3.5 rules on this? (3.5 was explicit that if you try to tumble through a threatened square and fail, you complete your move but provoke an AOO. If you try to tumble through an occupied space and fail, you stop before entering the enemy-occupied area and provoke.) Thanks!We continue to use the 3.5 rules for failures.
This came up in our last slot 0 game for the upcoming gameday. I (level 1 rogue) wanted to tumble through a doorway that had 2 bad guys in front of it (side by side) and my parties fighter in the doorway. This didnt come up at the time(we were trying to finish the round in the alloted 4 hours) but since the square with the fighter in it is still threatened when i tumbled through him. That means it is an AoO CMD+2(for both enemies) and I think it is just 1 roll and you have to beat the DC. Then i can tumble through the enemies square without an Aoo or DC acrobatics roll unless all eenemies have combat reflexes. It doesnt say in the ruling that you get stopped if you fail it just states "use this if you want to move through a threatened area or enemies space" when you want to move to the square you want to finish in. Now if i was to tumble through an enemies square i would add +5 to the enemies CMD (only) and the +2 for any additional opponents. Again I think it is still only 1 roll beating any DCs that you can and any you dont the enemy gets an AoO. If by chance you get hit and it drops you to zero or worse...dead then you fall prone in whatever square you were going through....bad luck to you. It makes acrobatics fun to try and the DM can now smile every time your rogue or any one foolish enough to try it...no big deal.
It doesnt say in the ruling that you get stopped if you fail it just states "use this if you want to move through a threatened area or enemies space" when you want to move to the square you want to finish in.
Actually it says "Tumbling: A trained character can attempt to use Acrobatics to move through a square occupied by an opponent (see the Acrobatics skill)." Your paraphrase is close but doesn't capture the essence.
Maybe you feel the word attempt means you can go through on a failure, that's not the way I see it.
When you say "it doesn't say in the ruling" is this some PFS rulings?
|
|
My apologies, I used the word tumbling and it is not in the PF book. I have not seen where it says anywhere (doesnt mean that it isnt in the book, just have not seen it)"you can ATTEMPT to tumble through an opponents square...etc.". The book on page 88 says " In addition, you can move through a threatened square without provoking an attack of opportunity from an enemy by using Acrobatics." Please show me where in the ruling it states that if you fail you stop your movement? If you think i am paraphrasing please show me where. I think it is pretty clear that you can use Acrobatics skill to move through threatened squares and if you fail you take AoOs but you move through to where you are going. Obviously, if you dont have the movement you cannot do it.
I also think I used a reference above about getting morer than 1 AoO with Combat Reflexes, when moving through 2 threatened squares, you only get 1 per opponent. Now you may provoke some other way and if the opponent has combat reflexes then would get another.
It doesnt say in the ruling that you get stopped if you fail it just states "use this if you want to move through a threatened area or enemies space" when you want to move to the square you want to finish in.Actually it says "Tumbling: A trained character can attempt to use Acrobatics to move through a square occupied by an opponent (see the Acrobatics skill)." Your paraphrase is close but doesn't capture the essence.
Maybe you feel the word attempt means you can go through on a failure, that's not the way I see it.
When you say "it doesn't say in the ruling" is this some PFS rulings?
You know? He's right. Here's the snippet :
In addition, you can move through a threatened square without provoking an attack of opportunity from an enemy by using Acrobatics. When moving in this way, you move at half speed. You can move at full speed by increasing the DC of the check by 10. You cannot use Acrobatics to move past foes if your speed is reduced due to carrying a medium or heavy load or wearing medium or heavy armor. If an ability allows you to move at full speed under such conditions, you can use Acrobatics to move past foes. You can use Acrobatics in this way while prone, but doing so requires a full-round action to move 5 feet, and the DC is increased by 5.
Situation --> Base Acrobatics DC*
Move through a threatened area --> Opponent's Combat Maneuver Defense
Move through an enemy's space --> 5 + opponent's Combat Maneuver Defense
* This DC is used to avoid an attack of opportunity due to movement. This DC increases by 2 for each additional opponent avoided in 1 round.
Under the skill, it gives no 'attempting' statement.
However, I think the relevant part is under Movement.
Moving Through a SquareYou can move through an unoccupied square without difficulty in most circumstances. Difficult terrain and a number of spell effects might hamper your movement through open spaces.
Friend: You can move through a square occupied by a friendly character, unless you are charging. When you move through a square occupied by a friendly character, that character doesn't provide you with cover.
Opponent: You can't move through a square occupied by an opponent unless the opponent is helpless. You can move through a square occupied by a helpless opponent without penalty. Some creatures, particularly very large ones, may present an obstacle even when helpless. In such cases, each square you move through counts as 2 squares.
<snip>
Tumbling: A trained character can attempt to use Acrobatics to move through a square occupied by an opponent (see the Acrobatics skill).
So, you cannot move through an opponent's square unless he is helpless, or you use the acrobatics skill. The Acrobatics skill only mentions the DC for the AoO, but the Movement chapter specifically states you can only attempt it with Acrobatics.
Logically then, if you fail the DC, you fail to move through the square, because the only way you can move through an enemies occupied square is with an acrobatics check. And of course, if you fail, you also take an AoO.
|
|
It doesnt say in the ruling that you get stopped if you fail it just states "use this if you want to move through a threatened area or enemies space" when you want to move to the square you want to finish in.Actually it says "Tumbling: A trained character can attempt to use Acrobatics to move through a square occupied by an opponent (see the Acrobatics skill)." Your paraphrase is close but doesn't capture the essence.
Maybe you feel the word attempt means you can go through on a failure, that's not the way I see it.
When you say "it doesn't say in the ruling" is this some PFS rulings?
You know? He's right. Here's the snippet :
In addition, you can move through a threatened square without provoking an attack of opportunity from an enemy by using Acrobatics. When moving in this way, you move at half speed. You can move at full speed by increasing the DC of the check by 10. You cannot use Acrobatics to move past foes if your speed is reduced due to carrying a medium or heavy load or wearing medium or heavy armor. If an ability allows you to move at full speed under such conditions, you can use Acrobatics to move past foes. You can use Acrobatics in this way while prone, but doing so requires a full-round action to move 5 feet, and the DC is increased by 5.
Situation --> Base Acrobatics DC*
Move through a threatened area --> Opponent's Combat Maneuver Defense
Move through an enemy's space --> 5 + opponent's Combat Maneuver Defense
* This DC is used to avoid an attack of opportunity due to movement. This DC increases by 2 for each additional opponent avoided in 1 round.
Under the skill, it gives no 'attempting' statement.
However, I think the relevant part is under Movement.
...
Moving Through a SquareYou can move
I see on pg. 193 what you are talking about. I still say you CAN move through the square using Acrobatics(fail or not). If you want think that the "moving through a square rules" overides the acrobatics skill then use it. I would like to see a rule clarification before i say it does.