| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So after fiddling around with Pathfinder for a couple years, its become obvious the rules for Acrobatics checks to leave threatened areas are really difficult to pull off, some examples
1) CR6 Wyvern, CMD 23
A 6th level rogue with 16 dex and max acrobatics and a MW chain shirt and requires a 12, a 40% attempt. (+11)
2) CR 12 Athach, CMD 34 (I was going to use a Purple Worm for the example but the 40 CMD made me cringe)
Our 12th level rogue now has 20 dex, max ranks and a +3 chain shirt and now needs a 15, a 25% chance. (+19)
3) CR 18 Dragon, Red, Very Old, CMD 49
Our stalwart rogue managed to worm his way to 18 and now has 26 dex max ranks and a +5 chain shirt and now needs a 21, a 0% chance.(+28)
I find it a bit of a put off that in order to make these checks as a light armor wearing, highly dexterous character, you need to invest in skill focus, athletic, or magic items that boost acrobatics. To say nothing of classes that cart around a 14 dex that put some ranks in it, they should at least have a punchers chance of trying to tumble.
I propose a switch to 10+CR of the monster to acrobatics from them, which is along the lines of knowledge checks, and in fact, most skill checks (like feinting).
Adjusted, the DC's and chance of the rogue for the above listed
1) 16, 75%
2) 22, 85%
3) 28, 100%
Gasp someone got better at something as they leveled up, rather than worse. Hold me Martha the rogue might actually attempt a (swoon) full movement acrobatics check.
Obviously you can't re write the rules, just throwing this out in case anyone else is playing a home game they'd like to see an increase to the ability to dodge blows and be awesome in combat by jumping around and feeling like they are doing something rather than just rolling dice and five stepping.
Our group has actually begun to toy with this idea over the past couple of weeks and have found it to be quite an elegant fix for troublesome Acrobatics DCs. I endorse this rule.
Just use 3E's static tumble DCs. The rogue and monk being able to move around the battlefield safely won't break the damn game. It certainly didn't in 3E.
Please don't make me create a giant list of all the spells and class features other classes get to move without provoking with no failure chance at all, I'd rather not go to all that effort. But there's a lot.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
People have noticed the problem before. However, I dislike the idea of using CR as a solution. CR is an artificial construct, divorced from the game world. More importantly, such a system would mean that a skilled warrior was as easy to dodge around as a decrepit wizard, and there would be absolutely no way for the defender to make this more difficult. Meanwhile a character could easily make it trivial at even the lowest of levels with feats, class features, or magic.
Feint is a good example for a solution, though it should be noted it does not work off of CR, either. It is 10 + BaB + Wis, or 10 + Sense Motive, whichever is higher. A check against 10 + BaB + Str or Dex, or 10+Acrobatics, might be interesting. At the very least it would stop so strongly favoring huge, lumbering monsters over small, quick acrobats.
Mort, why should str be a factor at all in stopping someone's tumbling? It should be dex-based to "defend" against, period.
Using BAB as a factor just means the big pile of HD monsters will remain the toughest ones to tumble past.
What is wrong with a flat DC? No one seems to care that threat level / skill of the foe means NOTHING when it's a caster using concentration to cast defensively...
The only reason I didn't mention the 3.5 tumble dc is that it was 15, and I thought that would immediately send everyone into a tizzy about how people would get +14 tumble then stop.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, first your numbers are off.
Let's look at what a real Rogue has by 6th level. He's definitely got a Mithral Chain Shirt, and at least Dex 18 So that's a +13 and a 50% shot.
By 12th his Dex is more like 24 and his armor still has no armor check penalty so we're talking +22 and a 40% chance.
By 18th a proper Rogue will have Dex 28 at least, probably more like 32 and a total that's +30 minimum, more like +32 in all likelihood, so a 10% or 20% chance.
And those are somewhat misleading simply because so many high CR creatures are so large. If your GM uses NPC enemies, or monsters with class levels, or indeed anything but Gargantuan stuff, those later numbers get a lot better.
Second, there are ways to improve those odds: Off the top of my head Boots of Elvenkind give +5 Acrobatics (and thus +25% chances to all of the above) and are cheap as hell (they can be addedc onto other boots for under 4k GP). Skill Focus gives a +3 bonus (+6 at 10th level and up) a +15% (or +30%) chance on top of that.
The boots alone make the chances 75%, 65%, and 35 or 45%. With skill Focus as well they become 90%, 95%, and 65 or 75%.
Third, your assumptions are faulty: You seem to be assuming that Acrobatics to avoid AoO should be automatic at higher levels, it shouldn't, at least not against all oponents. It's a skill (and one with other uses) not an 'I win' button. You need to invest things (like the extremely cheap Boots) to have good odds, and a more meaningful investment (lie Skill Focus) to make it close to a sure thing.
The only reason I didn't mention the 3.5 tumble dc is that it was 15, and I thought that would immediately send everyone into a tizzy about how people would get +14 tumble then stop.
It's 15 to move at half speed. 25 to move at full speed. +10 more if you want to go through someone's space instead of around it. +2 for every additional threatening foe you move past after the first. And possibly more DC increases in non-ideal terrain.
It wasn't hard, but to write it off as trivial is disengenuous. Even at only 15, getting to that +14 isn't until ~level 6-8 usually. +3 dex, +2 synergy bonus from jump 5 ranks, -1 armor check penalty...that's a +4 before ranks. You'd need 10 ranks (level 7 in 3E) to achieve a +4. This is what a typical tumbling character would have for dex, ranks, etc... A high dex build would obviously get to +14 sooner, but will suffer for it in combat effectiveness or feat cost if trying to apply that dex to combat rolls. A 16 dex is not exactly a low amount, either.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, first your numbers are off.
Let's look at what a real Rogue has by 6th level. He's definitely got a Mithral Chain Shirt, and at least Dex 18 So that's a +13 and a 50% shot.
By 12th his Dex is more like 24 and his armor still has no armor check penalty so we're talking +22 and a 40% chance.
By 18th a proper Rogue will have Dex 28 at least, probably more like 32 and a total that's +30 minimum, more like +32 in all likelihood, so a 10% or 20% chance.
And those are somewhat misleading simply because so many high CR creatures are so large. If your GM uses NPC enemies, or monsters with class levels, or indeed anything but Gargantuan stuff, those later numbers get a lot better.
Second, there are ways to improve those odds: Off the top of my head Boots of Elvenkind give +5 Acrobatics (and thus +25% chances to all of the above) and are cheap as hell (they can be addedc onto other boots for under 4k GP). Skill Focus gives a +3 bonus (+6 at 10th level and up) a +15% (or +30%) chance on top of that.
The boots alone make the chances 75%, 65%, and 35 or 45%. With skill Focus as well they become 90%, 95%, and 65 or 75%.
Third, your assumptions are faulty: You seem to be assuming that Acrobatics to avoid AoO should be automatic at higher levels, it shouldn't, at least not against all oponents. It's a skill (and one with other uses) not an 'I win' button. You need to invest things (like the extremely cheap Boots) to have good odds, and a more meaningful investment (lie Skill Focus) to make it close to a sure thing.
This is the type of post I was expecting, ask yourself do you need to go to these lengths for what skills? Sense Motive? Knowledge checks? Bluffs? Find me a skill a level 18 character with + 28 has trouble making vs a cr appropriate adversary. I said in my post you really shouldn't have to take feats and magic items to pull a 50/50 chance at things. Also, not everyone plays in games where 20's as starting stats and +4 stat items are candy. And again, how does any of this give a 14 dex pure fighter a slim (like 15%) chance of pulling off an epic tumble to save his life?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, first your numbers are off.
Let's look at what a real Rogue has by 6th level. He's definitely got a Mithral Chain Shirt, and at least Dex 18 So that's a +13 and a 50% shot.
Why on earth is he paying for mithral chain shirt, max dex +6, when he only has +4 dex? He probably has an 18 dex after a +2 belt, but it's unlikely to be much higher. Maybe 20 if he's using finesse + agile weapon. I'd also like to point out, tumble isn't just for 0 armor check penalty super high dex types. If your argument is you need to be extremely optimized for tumbling in order for the statistics to work, it sounds like a broken system.
By 12th his Dex is more like 24 and his armor still has no armor check penalty so we're talking +22 and a 40% chance.
A 40% chance is abominable. Why are you touting it?
By 18th a proper Rogue will have Dex 28 at least, probably more like 32 and a total that's +30 minimum, more like +32 in all likelihood, so a 10% or 20% chance.
Dude, my 17th level WIZARD that started w/ Int 20 has an Int of 30 currently and it's the highest ability score among the whole party by 4 points. You're SERIOUSLY underestimating how multiple ability dependent rogues are! Even with that ridiculous dex, your success rate is at about the level of "level 1 commoner trying to shoot a bow at a golden great wyrm dragon." That's even more abominable! And the rogue's getting worse and falling more and more behind on his tumbling the more he advances!
And those are somewhat misleading simply because so many high CR creatures are so large. If your GM uses NPC enemies, or monsters with class levels, or indeed anything but Gargantuan stuff, those later numbers get a lot better.
I disagree. If the NPCs are optimized at all, they will have good CMD numbers, too. Lots of stupid crap adds to CMD. Size, str, dex, deflection, luck, anything else that adds to touch AC... Even high level classed humanoids can easily end up w/ very high CMD, even if the DM was just trying to provide them with a good AC and wasn't even thinking about CMD.
Second, there are ways to improve those odds: Off the top of my head Boots of Elvenkind give +5 Acrobatics (and thus +25% chances to all of the above) and are cheap as hell (they can be addedc onto other boots for under 4k GP). Skill Focus gives a +3 bonus (+6 at 10th level and up) a +15% (or +30%) chance on top of that.
The boots alone make the chances 75%, 65%, and 35 or 45%. With skill Focus as well they become 90%, 95%, and 65 or 75%.
How many other skills, attacks, or other d20 rolls require items and feats just to acheive reasonable success rates beyond what you get from levelling up, buying basic gear, and so forth?
Third, your assumptions are faulty: You seem to be assuming that Acrobatics to avoid AoO should be automatic at higher levels, it shouldn't, at least not against all oponents. It's a skill (and one with other uses) not an 'I win' button. You need to invest things (like the extremely cheap Boots) to have good odds, and a more meaningful investment (lie Skill Focus) to make it close to a sure thing.
Tumbling does not win a fight! No one has ever won a fight by tumbling! If your hp/AC/attack/damage aren't up to snuff, you're going to get murdered in melee combat regardless of how well you can maneuver around.
Why won't this perception that doing somersaults and rolls = winning a fight die in a damned fire already?!
I don't know about using CR directly. I like the monster build itself having some effect on the situation. I agree, though, that the current situation does seem off balance against our poor acrobat.
A lot of the problem seems to stem from how CMD is applied and calculated. It's too generic; it utilizes Strength against bull rushes and grapples (which makes sense) but also against thinks like the rogue doing a backflip over the wyrm's talons to maneuver himself. Strength really doesn't help in such a situation, so why does it apply? Conversely, a ridiculously fast and dextrous creature with the same CR ought to be more challenging to outmaneuver for this.
I'm inclined to think of something along the lines of an opposed Acrobatics roll. I'd have to think about what kinds of modifiers would make enough sense to warrant complicating the rule, and what existing feats might improve either the acrobat or the defender.
I'm inclined to think of something along the lines of an opposed Acrobatics roll. I'd have to think about what kinds of modifiers would make enough sense to warrant complicating the rule, and what existing feats might improve either the acrobat or the defender.
That's been my view for years now, back before even PF came out. If you want to make tumbling harder, oppose it w/ tumble. The better you are at doing it, the better you know how to stop/disrupt it.
Could just do opposed rolls, or have a "defense" value of acrobatics modifier +10. Much simpler and more sensible.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is the type of post I was expecting, ask yourself do you need to go to these lengths for what skills? Sense Motive? Knowledge checks? Bluffs? Find me a skill a level 18 character with + 28 has trouble making vs a cr appropriate adversary.
Sure. Sense Motive and Stealth vs a CR 18 Blue Dragon have only a 34% chance of succes each at +28 (as opposed to his +32). Not quite as low, but then the Dragon doesn't have Skill Focus and is Gargantuan. Skill Focus on the Dragon's part makes that chance 13.75%
I said in my post you really shouldn't have to take feats and magic items to pull a 50/50 chance at things. Also, not everyone plays in games where 20's as starting stats and +4 stat items are candy.
I was assuming Dex 18 to start. On a Rogue. That's...pretty universal IME. And a +4 Dex item by 12th level is less than a sixth of your GP...it's a very reaonable purchase. And again, pretty universal by that level.
And again, how does any of this give a 14 dex pure fighter a slim (like 15%) chance of pulling off an epic tumble to save his life?
A Fighter who doesn't put ranks in Acrobatics is basically always gonna need a 20 to do this, whatever system you use, as long as it scales.
Why on earth is he paying for mithral chain shirt, max dex +6, when he only has +4 dex? He probably has an 18 dex after a +2 belt, but it's unlikely to be much higher. Maybe 20 if he's using finesse + agile weapon. I'd also like to point out, tumble isn't just for 0 armor check penalty super high dex types. If your argument is you need to be extremely optimized for tumbling in order for the statistics to work, it sounds like a broken system.
Every 6th level Rogue I've ever seen was pretty inclined to care about Armor Check penalty and not having one. High Max Dex is also good for getting Cat's Grace as a buff. Also, relatively cheap and comfy.
A lot of enemies are gonna be NPCs or otherwise somewhat less excessively CMD'd than the monsters in the Bestiary, and you don't need to be nearly as optimized as this (which isn't very) to get by them.
And frankly, if anyone who puts a point per level in Acrobatics can just walk right through AoO, why even have them? They slow the game down quite a bit, if they're that easy to get rid of, you should skip them altogether.
A 40% chance is abominable. Why are you touting it?
I wasn't. Just trying to clarify the actual starting numbers.
Dude, my 17th level WIZARD that started w/ Int 20 has an Int of 30 currently and it's the highest ability score among the whole party by 4 points. You're SERIOUSLY underestimating how multiple ability dependent rogues are! Even with that ridiculous dex, your success rate is at about the level of "level 1 commoner trying to shoot a bow at a golden great wyrm dragon." That's even more abominable! And the rogue's getting worse and falling more and more behind on his tumbling the more he advances!
Starting Dex 18 (after racial mod). All level ups there. +6 Dex belt. Then, assuming a reasonable GM your Wizard uses Planar Binding and you get +4 from Wishes. Hell, you can get +4 to everything fom Wishes if your GM's permissive. I'm aware that's not universal, which is why I listed both stat-sets.
And the rest's consistent with basically all the Dex-based Rogues I've seen played.
And vs. larger and larger foes who are also keeping up with his HD increases? Yeah, his odds go down a little unless he does something to compensate.
I disagree. If the NPCs are optimized at all, they will have good CMD numbers, too. Lots of stupid crap adds to CMD. Size, str, dex, deflection, luck, anything else that adds to touch AC... Even high level classed humanoids can easily end up w/ very high CMD, even if the DM was just trying to provide them with a good AC and wasn't even thinking about CMD.
Good? Yes. 49 at CR 18? Probably not. I'd expect 45 at most, more likely 40 or 42. Maybe less on a caster. That's a 20% to 45% increase in the odds of success.
How many other skills, attacks, or other d20 rolls require items and feats just to acheive reasonable success rates beyond what you get from levelling up, buying basic gear, and so forth?
Any skill directly opposed by CR appropriate foes who specialize on it. As noted above.
Tumbling does not win a fight! No one has ever won a fight by tumbling! If your hp/AC/attack/damage aren't up to snuff, you're going to get murdered in melee combat regardless of how well you can maneuver around.
Why won't this perception that doing somersaults and rolls = winning a fight die in a damned fire already?!
That...wasn't what I meant at all. I meant: "It's a skill, not an Instant Success power." That it doesn't auto-win within it's area. Nothing to do with winning a fight per se.
Bravo Deamanwalking good points
Acrobatics and tumbling should not be automatic.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Anything I want to post that points to common sense here gets erased and filled with anger text. I will decline to think about this thread anymore.
Just curious. Do these numbers include the Skill Focus or Acrobatic feats?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I want basic tumbling to be autosuccess for the classes focused on it (rogue and monk) because that means it will be a limited chance for others and because rogues and monks need all help they can get.
I use 3.5 dcs with an additional +1 for every four bab.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
What if Uncanny Dodge, in addition to its current usage, also allowed the character to deny their opponent's Strength to CMD when making tumble checks?
What if Uncanny Dodge, in addition to its current usage, also allowed the character to deny their opponent's Strength to CMD when making tumble checks?
That's not a bad idea. Not a bad idea at all. Plussed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem I see is that being big and strong should not be the be-all-and-end-all singular feature it is now.
For most maneuvers attempted agaist you, adding size and strength into CMD makes perfect sense. If I am stronger or larger (and thus, heavier), it is more difficult to shove me away, tackle me, whatever. The problems start when, for stramlining's sake, everything is pitted agains that one universal defense.
Is it sensible to assume fighting prowess (aka BAB) and reflexes (aka Dex modifier) are crucial when it comes to stop someone from getting past me. But, just what how fark is being stronger, getting larger (thus needing more strength to move my way around), or having a force field surrounding my body (aka Deflection bonus to AC) supposed to help me in that regard?
On the other hand of the spectrum, why is it supposed to be ridiculously easy to grab a tiny creature (I am not referring to keeping a grab on it once you have it), or to shatter its equipment into pieces... when it is dang hard to actually touch the critter at all?
In my opinion, there should be an, let's call it, agility CMD (which would not contain Str, Size and deflection bonuses), which would the base DC for any tumbling attempts. Downside is, you have yet another combat statistic.
Any combat maneuvers that rely on hitting a target, or part of it with any means of precision (e.g. grab or sunder unless you have established contact otherwise) should have a DC of the target's CMD or touch AC, whichever higher.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Number 6, a +6 belt of Dexterity (which is 36,000 gp) isn't that farfetched at 18th level, where your expected Wealth per Level is 530,000 gp. Hell, if your wizard wants to, he can craft it for half the price. And an 18 Dex after racial modifiers isn't unheard of either. Then there are the attribute bonuses every fourth level... I'm not sure where you are getting min/maxing from here. Or maybe you have a bone to pick with Dead Man Walking. I don't really care either way.
Just theory-crafting here. If I decide to have a 16 dexterity at level 1. I'm level 18 now. With just a belt of dexterity and some feats, here is what I would calculate.
- Dex 26 (16 + Belt of +6 Dex + Attribute bonuses from level 4,8,12,& 16). This modifier is +8
- Acrobatics with 18 ranks plus it is a class skill (+3). That makes it 29.
- Skill Focus (+6 because you have more than 10 ranks in Acrobatics). This makes it a 35.
At this point, to tumble around a CMD 49 (which is an extreme example since it is a dragon), you have to roll a 14 or more to tumble effectively. That's a 35% chance to make it. A bit rough, admittedly. If you had an 18 Dex at level 1, it would bump up to a 13 or more (40%). If you decide to take the feat Acrobatic (which I would. It's nice), you get a +4 to your Acrobatics check (10 ranks), bumping your Dex 16 Rogue to need to roll a 10 or above (55% chance) and your Dex 18 rogue to need a roll of 9 or above (60% chance) to clear the dragon's CMD. Then there are other bonuses, like the halfling's Surefooted racial trait, which can help.
Now, as far as I know, the CMD of the dragon already has everything factored into it (Size, etc). From what I've seen of statblocks in the bestiary, they include size bonuses. But with just one feat and a magic item, you can clear it within reason. With two feats, you have a much better chance at doing it. And honestly, I'd have to agree that tumbling shouldn't be 100%. Nothing should be 100% to be honest, or why bother even rolling dice?
This isn't to say that the CMD for Tumbling is perfect. I don't know. I can't tell you that. This is just my approach to the issue, doing the math and such.
EDIT: As an aside, did the math and the size bonus is included with the dragon.
|
|
Just curious. Do these numbers include the Skill Focus or Acrobatic feats?
Glutton's do not. Mine have Skill Focus (though not Acrobatic) thrown in. Acrobatic would stack, and add +10% to the first number, and +20% to the two higher ones.
What if Uncanny Dodge, in addition to its current usage, also allowed the character to deny their opponent's Strength to CMD when making tumble checks?
Ooh. Interesting idea, but perhaps a little overpowered...maybe have it deny Size Bonus instead? That's where the real issue is.
First off Deadmanwalking, pls do not even try to respond with thine Min-Max examples to what I'm about to type.
Some of us do not play the game with expectations of a 15th level character having a +5 Gary Gygax Vorpal sword they bought at the small town magic shop.
I'm actualy a huge fan of low-magic games, and despise 'magic item shops'. And I'm certainly not inclined to Monty Haul-ism, but the game is predicated on certain items being available. A Mithral Chain shirt by 6th, a +4 Dex Item by 12th and a +6 one by 18th is basically what the game is based on you having (and the only items needed...well, aside from the boots). Check out the GFASWL thread to see the kind of system logic involved, and hopefully discuss ways around it.
Now that my disclaimer is out of the way; I'll suggest a way to have some potential for a mundane lady like a Rogue to be able to Acrobatics her way past a big baddy monster.
Uh...she can. With a little investment, pretty reliably. I'm sticking with that whole 'shouldn't be a sure thing' here.
I enjoy encouraging non-spellcasting classes.
So do I, I just don't think something like this should be free. Maybe we should re-work the Mobility Feat. It's a bit of a speed-bump at the moment, and this really should be what it's for...
A flat +5 or +6 bonus to Tumble Checks only (doubled at 10 ranks of Acrobatics) would pretty much solve this as a problem and not seem unbalanced compared to, say, Skill Focus.
This would sorta necessitate the Mobility Feat to do this sort of thing, bu c'mon folks, it is called Mobility...
Glutton & Deadmanwalking: your probabilities are actually 5% too low.
For example, +11 bonus with DC 23 means that you fail on an 11 or lower. That's a 55% chance of failure, and a 45% chance of success.
Ah, you're right. I didn't even think of checking that, I just went with Glutton's numbers and then changed them based on how different mine were.
To Deadmanwalking: for any character who actually wants to be good at tumbling around the battlefield, the Boots of Elvenkind are an item/gp tax. Not a big deal at high levels, but significant at low levels.
They are indeed. But they're least (or not) needed at low levels, so that's not a huge deal.
EDIT: Ninja'd a little:
Number 6, a +6 belt of Dexterity (which is 36,000 gp) isn't that farfetched at 18th level, where your expected Wealth per Level is 530,000 gp. Hell, if your wizard wants to, he can craft it for half the price. And an 18 Dex after racial modifiers isn't unheard of either. Then there are the attribute bonuses every fourth level... I'm not sure where you are getting min/maxing from here. Or maybe you have a bone to pick with Dead Man Walking. I don't really care either way.
Yeah, I dunno what's up with that either. Never even talked to the guy before.
At this point, to tumble around a CMD 49 (which is an extreme example since it is a dragon), you have to roll a 14 or more to tumble effectively. That's a 35% chance to make it. A bit rough, admittedly. If you had an 18 Dex at level 1, it would bump up to a 13 or more (40%). If you decide to take the feat Acrobatic (which I would. It's nice), you get a +4 to your Acrobatics check (10 ranks), bumping your Dex 16 Rogue to need to roll a 10 or above (55% chance) and your Dex 18 rogue to need a roll of 9 or above (60% chance) to clear the dragon's CMD. Then there are other bonuses, like the halfling's Surefooted racial trait, which can help.
You leave out the 2,500 GP Boots of Elvenkind, a cheap +5 to this making it 60% to 85%. And admittedly a bit of an item tax if you wish to do this regularly.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This post deserved it's own, separate, response:
The problem I see is that being big and strong should not be the be-all-and-end-all singular feature it is now.
For most maneuvers attempted agaist you, adding size and strength into CMD makes perfect sense. If I am stronger or larger (and thus, heavier), it is more difficult to shove me away, tackle me, whatever. The problems start when, for stramlining's sake, everything is pitted agains that one universal defense.
I couldn't agree more. For example, a Halfling or Goblin Weapon Finesse or Agile Maneuvers build should thematically be one of the best folks ever at maneuvers like trip and dirty trick. Putting one over on the large people is their bread and butter...yet the same build is infinitely better as a human. It's really pretty unfortunate.
Is it sensible to assume fighting prowess (aka BAB) and reflexes (aka Dex modifier) are crucial when it comes to stop someone from getting past me. But, just what how fark is being stronger, getting larger (thus needing more strength to move my way around), or having a force field surrounding my body (aka Deflection bonus to AC) supposed to help me in that regard?
The force-field I can maybe see, as it's invisible and gets in the person in question's way. The rest? Yeah, I'm totally with you on a logical and thematic level.
On the other hand of the spectrum, why is it supposed to be ridiculously easy to grab a tiny creature (I am not referring to keeping a grab on it once you have it), or to shatter its equipment into pieces... when it is dang hard to actually touch the critter at all?
Again, yep, total agreement here. In my games I've alleviated this somewhat by introducing the House Rule that anyone with Weapon Finesse/Agile Maneuvers (combined into one Feat in my games) can ignore the Size Penalty on CMB and CMD. Still not really enough, but it does help somewhat.
In my opinion, there should be an, let's call it, agility CMD (which would not contain Str, Size and deflection bonuses), which would the base DC for any tumbling attempts. Downside is, you have yet another combat statistic.
Everything includes Deflection. But I do tend to agree, from a realism and thematic standpoint. You could use the same one for Dirty Trick and other such maneuvers (Sunder and Steal, for example...probably not Disarm or Trip...though those you might have to target whichever was higher). But, unless you include something else in it, this is gonna really mess up game balance in a lot of ways. A lot more work is needed before it becomes a viable House Rule. Something else needs to be added, but I don't know what, maybe Wis mod?
And, for symmetry, you should probably remove Dex and some AC Bonuses from the 'Strength CMD' and replace it with something, maybe Con Mod?
Actually...something like that could work:
Agility CMD: 10 + BAB + Dex + Wis + AC bonuses currently going to CMD
Strength CMD: 10 + BAB + Str + Con + Some AC bonuses (Deflection, Sacred, Luck, not Dodge or the like) + Size Modifiers
Maneuvers divided as folows:
Target Agility: Dirty Trick, Steal, Sunder, Tumbling (not really a maneuver, but it is our topic),
Target Strength: Bull Rush, Drag, Overrun, Grapple,
Target Whichever is Higher: Disarm, Reposition, Trip,
Size Penalties to CMB only apply when targeting Strength CMD.
Let's see how this works on, oh, a Dragon and a Pixie:
Dragon: Agility CMD: 38 Strength CMD: 57 (61 vs. Trip) Original: 49
Pixie: Agility CMD: 21 Strength CMD: 9 Original: 15
So it'll usuallyadd about to one what it subtracts from the other, but allow appropriate maneuver targeting to help a lot.
The big disadvantage is how much work this would be, of course. Especially since sources of CMD aren't broken down like AC is.
Any combat maneuvers that rely on hitting a target, or part of it with any means of precision (e.g. grab or sunder unless you have established contact otherwise) should have a DC of the target's CMD or touch AC, whichever higher.
I can see that, actually.
What about dc 10+reflex? If we really need it to scale.
|
|
Why not make it the same as the feint check DC: 10 plus BAB plus Wis modifier, or 10 plus Sense Motive.
Not a bad idea...but perhaps not the best one either. Unlike avoiding being feinted, stopping people from tumbling by seems like something a Fighter should be able to be superb at without Sense Motive maxed.
Maybe BAB+Dex or Acrobatics as the opposing score? No, still doesn't quite work with fighters being good at this (which they should be).
You really need something that scales at about the same rate as skills do to make this truly meaningful.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Any skill directly opposed by CR appropriate foes who specialize on it. As noted above.How many other skills, attacks, or other d20 rolls require items and feats just to acheive reasonable success rates beyond what you get from levelling up, buying basic gear, and so forth?
While I don't disagree with the notion that tumble should not necessarily be an autosuccess all the time, I have some problem with this argument.
Yes, bluffing against a noble or diplomat who has skill focus (sense motive) and probably magic items will be hard even for the 30 cha sorcerer with max bluff. Or at least not auto-success.
But against some dumb fighter of 5 levels higher? Hell yeah, I can sell that guy the local bridges if I wanted.
It should be the same with tumble. Why does "being big and strong" equal "specialising in catching tumblers"? That makes no sense.
As I see it, the problem stems from the fact that CMD is used for too much, and more importantly, too many different things.
There are things where "being big and strong" certainly helps, like being overrun or bullrushed or tripped.
I just checked though, Bull Rush, Drag, Overrun, Reposition and Trip all have the "one size category larger than you" limit. So that takes care of the being big and strong protection here and it makes perfect sense. Also if inside the allowed limits, being strong or bigger (or being weak and smaller) makes all of these manouvers easier or harder respectively.
Let's look at the other combat maneuvers that are there. Dirty Trick, Disarm, Grapple, Steal and Sunder. I would argue that being big or strong or both helps with almost all of those. How could you disarm or sunder a weapon if it's 10 ft or more above you and twice as large as you? Grapple the dragon as a human? Good luck. Throw sand in the eyes of the giant? Possible but not easy.
So, for these the size modifier actually makes quite a bit of sense. However for all but grapple and disarm I'd say the str modifier to CMD doesn't. Maybe dex or wis or something else. (remember most of those where it makes sense already have the size limit included too)
Now comes Tumble which uses the very same mechanic. However WHY is being big or strong any help in getting that guy?
Let's take a RL example. Since most of us don't really have experience with dragons and the like, I scale it down a few sizes and use this:
Mouse vs Human.
So a mouse obviously will not bull rush or trip a human, due to the large size difference. That makes perfect sense.
It's also unlikely the mouse will steal anything from your pocket, even though there's a chance for it. That probably doesn't happen in RL very often, but it might perhaps. Dirty Trick could be biting your ankle or something to make you entangled or sickened or something. (human's size helps here but not really his strength)
Unlikely but not totally out there. And would be funny to watch.
Sunder and Disarm or grapple? Yes I don't really see that happening (here your str+size over the mouse should make that very impossible)
Tumbling now. The mouse is going to run circles around the human and between his legs and everything. Yes there's a chance the human gets a lucky hit in and stomps the mouse (eww), but it's certainly not 80%. And being bigger and stronger does not help with catching it at all.
So my point: CMD works perfectly fine (almost) for almost all the combat maneuvers. Sometimes it would be better with another stat than Str.
But for Acrobatics it's simply the wrong stat to use as the target DC. It makes no sense at all.
They should have made it like Feint, that's mot a combat maneuver, but similar, and uses it's own DC. So in line of that, 10 + BAB + Dex or 10 + Acrobatics, whichever is higher sounds good (yes someone mentioned that before). Hell, 10 + BAB + Wis wouldn't be wrong either and perhaps better even (as it's using your intuition to guess where the tumble will end so you can hit him)
That way the fighter has a better chance at catching the rogue than the wizard, which makes sense. On the other hand the rogue has an even higher chance, because he knows those moves himself (high Acrobatics skill) and can estimate better where the enemy will end up being and hit him.
Why not make it the same as the feint check DC: 10 plus BAB plus Wis modifier, or 10 plus Sense Motive.Not a bad idea...but perhaps not the best one either. Unlike avoiding being feinted, stopping people from tumbling by seems like something a Fighter should be able to be superb at without Sense Motive maxed.
Maybe BAB+Dex or Acrobatics as the opposing score? No, still doesn't quite work with fighters being good at this (which they should be).
You really need something that scales at about the same rate as skills do to make this truly meaningful.
Why should figthers be the best at that?
Good yes (they have high BAB, so they'll not be bad at it), but why the best?|
|
Why should figthers be the best at that?
Good yes (they have high BAB, so they'll not be bad at it), but why the best?
Not the best, necessarily, but among them. And because blocking enemy movement past them is integral to their role in a party (assuming a melee character anyway). The same is true of all full BAB classes to some degree.
The Cleric (for Sense Motive) or Rogue (for Acrobatics) don't have that as their role and shouldn't be flat-out better than the Fighter at it.
Just use 3E's static tumble DCs. The rogue and monk being able to move around the battlefield safely won't break the damn game. It certainly didn't in 3E.
That was my experience as well. I thought a better solution to including BAB and Strength bonuses into tumbling DC calculations was create a feat or two that would make a creature more difficult to tumble around that would reflect their specialization in dealing with that kind of movement if you wanted to provide that kind of challenge to the tumblers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just get rid of AoO entirely. :)
I think it should be hard to tumble against monsters of great size. It's much easier normal size monsters as you are not dealing with size bonus to CMD. If you want to tumble around a very old dragon then they need to be very specialized in tumbling or don't expect to pull this off.
You rogue example should have max ranks in acrobatics, some magic items, some feats, and some talents to tumble against a dragon like that.
So grab Acrobatics Master with a Ninja trick (requires a ki pool), get skill focus acrobatics (it's free as Half Elf so why not). Pick up the Acrobatic feat and buy some boots of Elven kind.
Now you have a rogue starting with 16 Dex that has a 26 Dex. So that (18 ranks, 3 Class skill, 8 dex, 6 Skill focus, 4 Acrobatic feat, 5 boot, 20 Acrobatic master and no ACP) 64 bonus, automatically beating the dragons DC for acrobatics. All this cost you is 1 feat, a cheap magic item and a couple of rogues talents.
And you want make this easier?
|
|
What about lower levels?
Low levels it's not bad at all.
CR 3s have about 15-22 on CMD, so an average of 18. Even with Dex 18 and max skill ranks alone, you've got a +10 by that point, and decent odds (65%). Skill Focus makes them more than decent, if you really want. and a bit after that you get the Boots of elvenkind and are pretty good to go.
What about lower levels?I think it should be hard to tumble against monsters of great size. It's much easier normal size monsters as you are not dealing with size bonus to CMD. If you want to tumble around a very old dragon then they need to be very specialized in tumbling or don't expect to pull this off.
You rogue example should have max ranks in acrobatics, some magic items, some feats, and some talents to tumble against a dragon like that.
So grab Acrobatics Master with a Ninja trick (requires a ki pool), get skill focus acrobatics (it's free as Half Elf so why not). Pick up the Acrobatic feat and buy some boots of Elven kind.
Now you have a rogue starting with 16 Dex that has a 26 Dex. So that (18 ranks, 3 Class skill, 8 dex, 6 Skill focus, 4 Acrobatic feat, 5 boot, 20 Acrobatic master and no ACP) 64 bonus, automatically beating the dragons DC for acrobatics. All this cost you is 1 feat, a cheap magic item and a couple of rogues talents.
And you want make this easier?
At low level, under level 5 you will be succeeding with acrobatics about 60% of the time on average. Some encounters will be more and some will be less. Not bad for a starting character. I mean at level 1 you could have a 10 Acrobatics and at level 1. An orc has CDM of 14 so you can tumble past the orc on 4 or better or though the orc's space on 9 or better. Not bad for 1st level character. You attacks about that the same.
By 5th level you can have 41(5 rnk, 3 CS, 3 Dex, 3 SF, 2 Acr, 5 Comp, +20 AM) acrobatics 1-3 times per day depending on your wisdom. I usually go with a wisdom of at least 12 if not 14 because failing will saves suck. Though I'd probably skip the Acrobatics Master talent till higher level personally. Having a 21 Acrobatics is pretty good at 5th level if you don't take the Acrobatics Master ninja talent.
|
|
I don't see why fighters should be "superb" at counter-tumbling, at least not any more than other full BAB classes.
No, not better than. But not worse than, either. And using Sense Motive would make Fighters and Barbarians objectively notably worse at it than Paladins or Cavaliers. For Feint, that makes some sense, for Acrobatics, not so much.
There's also an issue of logic: Why does me being able to tell when I'm being lied to let me stop dodgy people from oving better? It's...really shaky, logic-wise.
My suggestion has a couple of benefits:-
1. It allows creatures with strong combat prowess (reflected by BAB) to be good at counter-tumbling. The best combatants with full BAB progression will scale at a similar rate to the dedicated tumblers.
This is true, and I like the idea of doing this based on some skill, I just don't think Sense Motive is the right one.
2. This rule uses an existing game mechanic: the same as that used for feint. No need to construct new DCs.
Using another skill (and it's associated ability) is hardly a difficult DC to construct.
|
|
How about the same as the feint check DC: 10 plus BAB plus DEX modifier.
No Sensing of Motive required. Just skill at attacking and some physical aptitude for preventing those pesky tumblers.
The issue with that is there are no Feats or Items to increase it, nor will it ever compensate for the Class Skill buonus. It doesn't have enough ability to keep up.
Either BAB + Ability or a skill really is perfect, we just don't seem to have a good skill to make it.
As a house rule (or part of a set of house rules with tumble balance in mind) existing feats could be altered. Combat reflexes could give a bonus to anti-tumble.
Why should figthers be the best at that?
Good yes (they have high BAB, so they'll not be bad at it), but why the best?Not the best, necessarily, but among them. And because blocking enemy movement past them is integral to their role in a party (assuming a melee character anyway). The same is true of all full BAB classes to some degree.
The Cleric (for Sense Motive) or Rogue (for Acrobatics) don't have that as their role and shouldn't be flat-out better than the Fighter at it.
Why would Fighter's be best at counter tumbling? Isn't the heavily armoured, slow moving Fighter exactly who the Rogue would be best at tumbling past?
Doesn't it make more sense that the agile, lightly armoured Monk or Barbarian should be much better at counter-tumbling? And who better to guess a Rogue's tricks than another Rogue?