Without Tumble or fights on slippy rope bridges what is acrobatics for?

[Mitth'raw'nuruo]

Question says it all. We're pretty well into a campaign, but the skill has not come up. At all.

So what are we doing wrong? How can I (as a player) make use of this skill. Frankly at this point I annoyed with myself for choosing it over Athletics. For a monk, which seems rather wrong.

(no one has tried to shove me, other people have been the targets of such attacks, however Athletics seems just as useful for resisting those attacks)

[eastmabl]

Contorting your body out of grapples.

[Specter]

Grapples as said, and some other stuff. In Curse of Strahd, you can use it to jump through razor traps without getting hurt.

Acrobatics is the kind of thing you create an use for according to the situation. If you have access to 3.5 material, you can use an Acro check whenever you would use a Tumble or Balance check (other than avoiding op. attacks).

[JellyPooga]

In 3ed terms;

Athletics is Climb, Jump and Swim.

Acrobatics is Balance and Tumble.

Acrobatics is for swinging from chandeliers, staying upright on slippery or unsteady footing, diving, cartwheels and basically any full-body movement that isn't climbing, jumping or swimming.

Skillfully dodging your way down a trap-infested corridor? Acrobatics.

Trying to keep your balance walking across the narrow bridge of doom? Acrobatics.

Fighting off pirates on a ship locked in the midst of a raging storm? Acrobatics.

Trapeze, Tight-Rope Walking, Pole Dancing (in conjunction with Performance), Capoeira, Yoga, Staying focused in a spinning room, playing Twister, squeezing through narrow gaps, Pole Vaulting, landing after a fall without hurting yourself...all involve at least an element of Acrobatics.

Basically, for an example from the movies; most of the physical shenanigans that Indiana Jones gets up to could be attributed to Acrobatics.

[Willie the Duck]

The first and obvious is avoiding grapples and shoves if you are a Dex build.

Otherwise, it is all dependent on DM and campaign. If your DM never has narrow beams to walk across or slippery rocks to clamber over, then the skill is going to be less useful.

[Ninja_Prawn]

Also, tumble is listed as an optional rule on page 272 of the DMG. According to that, you use Acrobatics both to perform your own and to foil someone else's tumbling. Maybe ask your DM to approve that?

[odigity]

So what are we doing wrong?

You? Nothing. Your DM, however... maybe it really just hasn't come up, or maybe they don't understand what it's for and aren't thinking of ways to use it, such as (from PHB 176):


Vour Dexterity (Acrobatics) check covers your attempt to stay on your feet in a tricky situation, such as when you're trying to run across a sheet of ice, balance on a tightrope, or stay upright on a rocking ship's deck. The DM might also call for a Dexterity (Acrobatics) check to see if you can perform acrobatic stunts, including dives, rolls, somersaults, and flips.

In previous editions, it was also used to reduce falling damage by half, which I think should still be an option. You can also argue for using Acrobatics in lieu of Performance (Cha) to impress people with an acrobatic performance, since the skill system in 5e is very flexible and DM-ruling-based.


Frankly at this point I annoyed with myself for choosing it over Athletics. For a monk, which seems rather wrong.

I generally prefer Athletics (if I can only pick one), because I build Dex-based Monks, and I feel silly playing a Monk who's incapable of basic climbing / swimming / jumping. I really prefer to get proficiency in both, even though there's some overlap, because of that reason. As a Monk, I feel I should be proficient in core physical skills (climbing AND balance...)

[Mitth'raw'nuruo]

Also, tumble is listed as an optional rule on page 272 of the DMG. According to that, you use Acrobatics both to perform your own and to foil someone else's tumbling. Maybe ask your DM to approve that?




You? Nothing. Your DM, however... maybe it really just hasn't come up, or maybe they don't understand what it's for and aren't thinking of ways to use it, such as (from PHB 176):



In previous editions, it was also used to reduce falling damage by half, which I think should still be an option. You can also argue for using Acrobatics in lieu of Performance (Cha) to impress people with an acrobatic performance, since the skill system in 5e is very flexible and DM-ruling-based.



I generally prefer Athletics (if I can only pick one), because I build Dex-based Monks, and I feel silly playing a Monk who's incapable of basic climbing / swimming / jumping. I really prefer to get proficiency in both, even though there's some overlap, because of that reason. As a Monk, I feel I should be proficient in core physical skills (climbing AND balance...)

The DM is new to D&D (good, he does not have hang ups from previous editions, which has someone who played 3.0 to pathfinder, I absolutely do), and is running a hell of a campaign. We've played with the same core for a decade and a half, and for a long time I wasn't going for the D&D, but the friendship. This campaign as really drawn me in for the first time in a long, long time.

We've generally used optional rules (feats & so on) and having talked about it (he liked the tumble still) I suspect now that I know about the variant rule, he'll allow it. He was reluctant to house rule it, as it could seriously change combat). This I totally understand. House rules can quickly become broken.

I agree with you, however there just wasn't enough skills to go around, and I made a call (perhaps the wrong one) between athletics and acrobatics from a usefulness point of view, however given my RP concept, I wouldn't change it.

Some good suggestions, keep them coming.



TUMBLE
A creature can try to tumble through a hostile creature's
space, ducking and weaving past the opponent. As an
action or a bonus action, the tumbler makes a Dexterity
(Acrobatics) check contested by the hostile creature's
Dexterity (Acrobatics) check. If the tumbler wins the
contest, it can move through the hostile creature's space
once this turn.


The way I read this, you would still provoke an attack of opportunity if you went outside of their threatened area.

[Ninja_Prawn]

The way I read this, you would still provoke an attack of opportunity if you went outside of their threatened area.

That's my reading, too. Though you could still take the Disengage action in combination for ULTIMATE MOBILITY. The benefit comes from the fact that enemy creatures are impassible otherwise. If you're facing Leonidas at Thermopylae, you need Tumble!

[grub]

nevermind, ninja'd on tumble DMG pg 272

[Ruslan]

You can use it proactively in the Make Rulings Not Rules spirit of 5e. "I step on the table and somersault over the vampire to stab it from behind!"
If the DM is cool, he'll let you make some kind of Acrobatics check for Advantage on your next attack or something like that.

[Tanarii]

The problem with the Acrobatics skill is the majority of things you'd want to do with it are already covered by Dex bonus to AC and Dex saves. It overlaps them, in that they already are used to achieve the same purpose. So you either allow Acrobatics to provide a mechanical bonus, which can turn into broken, or you don't, and it either becomes not used. Or worse, if checks are needed to succeed in any sort of Acrobatic feat during combat and failure causes a penalty, it actively becomes something that STOPS acrobatic feats in combat.

So yeah, it's a pretty pointless skill, unless you already have low Dex and you're trying to cover a small flaw: crappy balance.

[Saeviomage]

Take note that 5e suggests that
"Sometimes, the GM might ask for an ability check using a specific skill—for example, “Make a Wisdom (Perception) check.” At other times, a player might ask the GM if proficiency in a particular skill applies to a check."

I'd suggest making your case for using acrobatics any time you might mentally describe something as agile instead of strong.

[Tanarii]

Int (Acrobatics): never go in against a sicilian when death is on the line

[Ninja_Prawn]

Int (Acrobatics): never go in against a sicilian when death is on the line

I often use Strength (Acrobatics) for aerial leaps, and Dexterity (Athletics) for athletic feats that require more balance than power.

[Plaguescarred]

In the past i've used Dexterity (Acrobatics) to avoid getting knocked prone or shoved.

[Socratov]

Personally I, and my group with me, have ruled that acrobatics and athlethics are just two ways to solve the same movement related problem. Some stuff (like running and endurance for athlethics and somersaulting for acrobatics) is reserved for one or another, but when it comes to climbing, for instance, you can climb efficiently using dex(acrobatics) or brute force it using str(athlethics). If you, as a player, can describe why skill applies to a task, we (as a group) have ruled that the skill should apply. We have found that it allows for better roleplay and funnier solutions during play. It also allows players to view their character's options as tools and means to an end instead of a tax on their abilities.

[Spiritchaser]

Dex frontliners still "need" to survive shoves and grapples... Melee without athletics would be VERY strongly advised to take accrobatics to slip those.

At least in my campaign

[Shining Wrath]

Escaping a Grapple.
Any time a character wants to do something involving agility in combat. Swing from chandeliers, dive through the giant's legs, that sort of stuff.

[Tanarii]

but when it comes to climbing, for instance, you can climb efficiently using dex(acrobatics) or brute force it using str(athlethics)
Not try IRL unless you change what Dex represents. Otoh after the last thread on this, I came to the conclusion it's one of the better 'standard' uses of the alternate stats for skills variant rule. Basically, it's such a common misconception in people's heads that you might as well allow it, like Str (Intimidation).

[JellyPooga]

Not try IRL unless you change what Dex represents. Otoh after the last thread on this, I came to the conclusion it's one of the better 'standard' uses of the alternate stats for skills variant rule. Basically, it's such a common misconception in people's heads that you might as well allow it, like Str (Intimidation).

In the particular case of Dex (Acrobatics) used to climb, I'm not convinced we need to change what Dex represents, just to ensure that it's being used under the right circumstances.

Using Dex (Acrobatics) to climb a free-hanging rope is clearly way outside of the ball-park; that's a simple case of upper and lower body strength and you should be using Str (Athletics).

Using Dex (Acrobatics) to climb a tree, on the other hand, which is often as much to do with co-ordination and balance as it is brute strength, is definitely within the bounds of the ability score and skill in question.

The same applies to using different ability scores with skills normally associated with another (e.g. Con (Athletics) is appropriate to run a marathon, but not for climbing a rope) or other non-normal skill usage (e.g. using Animal Handling to intimidate a dog instead of Intimidate).

[Spiritchaser]

Not try IRL unless you change what Dex represents.

Actually climbing a rock face is more often about balance, technique and precision footwork than raw physical power. Climbing an overhung ladder may be more about strength, but how often does that happen... And even then...

Sure at the extreme you need both, but I have my players use whichever they'd rather for most climbs, and for some really balancy slab climb it would have to be accrobatics. If I ever do some jug ridden overhung climb, I might require athletics, but even then... Figure 4!

[Tanarii]

Using Dex (Acrobatics) to climb a tree, on the other hand, which is often as much to do with co-ordination and balance as it is brute strength, is definitely within the bounds of the ability score and skill in question.
I'm a rock-climber. It's primarily a combination of Str relative to body weight, and training. The only reason it's not just massive Str is that usually involves increasing body mass.

It's fairly common for folks to interpret 'wiry strength' as high Dex thoug. That's what I mean by changing what Dex represent. Otoh, I just looked at the 5e def of Dex, and it's "Dexterity measures agility, reflexes, and balance". It's kind of hard to argue that climbing involves no agility or balance ... just not the kind that I think of as 'Dex' agility and balance. So maybe the problem is just in my head.

[JellyPooga]

I'm a rock-climber.

Heh, me too and I get where you're coming from. On the other hand, no-one would accuse me of having a high Str (higher than average, maybe) and I'm fairly naff at climbing a rope with any great speed, but I can scale a wall (or a tree) pretty handily because I've got good co-ordination and balance (I could be accused of having a relatively high Dex).

[Willie the Duck]

So maybe the problem is just in my head.

No, this is part of an old, unending debate about what attributes represent and what they are actually good for. I think I agree that rock climbing is training>>overall condition>>strength-to-body-weight-ratio>>balance and coordination. Climbing being an athletics check is right. Normally I'd say that a high-Dex/low-Str character should take athletics to offset their low Str, but I agree that Dex is often used to represent "wiry strong" characters, so you might want to use Dex-Athletics to represent that and allow those characters to shine.

[Spiritchaser]

I'm a rock-climber. It's primarily a combination of Str relative to body weight, and training. The only reason it's not just massive Str is that usually involves increasing body mass.

It's fairly common for folks to interpret 'wiry strength' as high Dex thoug. That's what I mean by changing what Dex represent. Otoh, I just looked at the 5e def of Dex, and it's "Dexterity measures agility, reflexes, and balance". It's kind of hard to argue that climbing involves no agility or balance ... just not the kind that I think of as 'Dex' agility and balance. So maybe the problem is just in my head.

It's funny, I remember a 12a gym climb that I lavishly failed to climb, after weeks of trying, that was chiefly balance. It was about precise weight shifts and precise edging. You could argue that each of an accrobatics (dex) and an athletics(con) and hell, let's throw an accrobatics (int) in there as well, would be required.

I Also don't really see crack climbing as str, or at least not primarily so.

For the record, I have never climbed a 12, though I have climbed some high 5.11s just fine.

[Tanarii]

Woot happy to find many other climbers.

To be honest, I boil it down to climbing shoes. These turn anyone into a climbing God. :smallwink: so that's a climbers kit in 5e terms. Probably also granting advantage if you had modern shoes, which are just amazing.

But after that training, which would be the Athletics skill, not acrobatics. Why? Because it says it's about difficult situations when you're climbing. Acrobatics is for training in staying on your feet or acrobatic stunts, per the skill description.

Then either Str (because sufficient Str/body weight is critical for anything beyond a 5.9 or so) or Dex (because agility & balance is, as also pointed out above, necessary for really hard routes).

All in all though, generally speaking I'd rule Dex (Athletics) before Str (Acrobatics). YMMV and I'm definitely translating real world experience too much into game rules adjudication right now. :smallbiggrin:

[Spiritchaser]

Woot happy to find many other climbers.

To be honest, I boil it down to climbing shoes. These turn anyone into a climbing God. :smallwink: so that's a climbers kit in 5e terms.


Hmmm... That gives me an idea for a little magical treasure I can give the bladesinger that wouldn't make him overshadow the Warlock any more than he does, and which the warlock would not want...

Advantage on climbing checks, be they con str or dex and can take two steps on a vertical surface.

Though so far it's actually been the druid that has been taking fall damage...

[Willie the Duck]

Though so far it's actually been the druid that has been taking fall damage...

Because he is failing saves/checks, or has he perfected some form of shape-changing 'death from above' attack (aka 'operation Dumbo drop')?

[Spiritchaser]

Because he is failing saves/checks, or has he perfected some form of shape-changing 'death from above' attack (aka 'operation Dumbo drop')?

I'm not going to suggest bear bombing to him, because I know he'll do it

I guess that would be accrobatics(dex) or even accrobatics(wis) ... Since its a perception and timing thing

[Vogonjeltz]

Not try IRL unless you change what Dex represents. Otoh after the last thread on this, I came to the conclusion it's one of the better 'standard' uses of the alternate stats for skills variant rule. Basically, it's such a common misconception in people's heads that you might as well allow it, like Str (Intimidation).

Strength (Intimidation) would be for when someone intimidates through a physical feat (i.e. casually bending a metal object or smashing something over their knee).

[JellyPooga]

Strength (Intimidation) would be for when someone intimidates through a physical feat (i.e. casually bending a metal object or smashing something over their knee).

I only allow Strength (Intimidation), myself, when a physical feat is actually performed as part of the check (such as your bar bending); just posing and looking large and scary still goes to Charisma in my book.

[Willie the Duck]

I'm not going to suggest bear bombing to him, because I know he'll do it

I guess that would be accrobatics(dex) or even accrobatics(wis) ... Since its a perception and timing thing

I'm not in favor of adding another "use a skill check as an attack" effect to the game. Expertise (athletics) for grappling is already sketchy, and would be potentially overpowered if not for the build required to pull it off (str-based character taking levels in rogue or lore bard) being a weird and otherwise clunky build.

I'd just call death from above an automatic hit, and both target and bomber taking the falling damage (maybe one side or the other getting some level of resistance or... advantage/disadvantage on the damage roll? Something).

[Douche]

Has anyone ever used Acrobatics for a grapple check?

I've only seen one noobie DM allow it. He was the one to suggest it, actually. I guess I sorta rationalized it as, like, utilizing your opponents weight & momentum against them.

Like, in pro wrestling terms, it'd be like a Rey Mysterio hurracarana (sp?) type move, rather than the Undertaker using his raw strength for a suplex or something (I know those would be more like shoves to make your opponent prone, but that's the best example I can come up with lol)

[Spiritchaser]

If one of my players wanted to do a flying leg grapple I'd let them try if they could describe it in a way that made sense and sounded cool. I can think of a certain avenger who pulls stunts like that... but I'd set the DC somewhere near egregious/give them a static penalty on the contest/give them dissadvantage/whatever.

[LordVonDerp]

Escaping Grapples
Climbing
Jumping
Swinging from stuff
Standing on the roof of a moving vehicle.


Honestly if acrobatics checks aren't seeing much use then the DM isn't doing a good enough job.

[Tanarii]

Escaping Grapples
Climbing
JumpingAthletics.


Swinging from stuff
Standing on the roof of a moving vehicle.Agreed. But from a DM perspective, it's important to keep in mind that if you're required to make a check for any acrobatic maneuver, then players will do them less, not more. They should only happen when the outcome is in doubt.

Similar to how Climbing, Jumping and Swimming don't require an Athletics check, you just do them. Unless it's tricky ...

[Coffee_Dragon]

Athletics.

Escaping grapples is certainly a valid use of Acrobatics.

I'm conflicted on Climban and Jumpan. There is this not uncommon trope of the nimble leaper; strong is heavy and lumbering, nimble is small and bouncy. If you force Athletics for all climbing and jumping, you kind of crush the idea of the graceful cat burglar who parkours airily around the roofscape but just isn't that strong. On the other hand it also makes sense to say that if you want that, just don't dump STR, flavour it as wiry, proportional strength, take Expertise if available, and don't try to get everything under the same SAD umbrella.

[Tanarii]

Escaping grapples is certainly a valid use of Acrobatics.It is. But why when you can take Athletics instead, and add in Climbing, Swimming and Jumping?

The answer of course is you're primarily interested in escaping grapples and are a Dex-character.


I'm conflicted on Climban and Jumpan. There is this not uncommon trope of the nimble leaper; strong is heavy and lumbering, nimble is small and bouncy. If you force Athletics for all climbing and jumping, you kind of crush the idea of the graceful cat burglar who parkours airily around the roofscape but just isn't that strong. On the other hand it also makes sense to say that if you want that, just don't dump STR, flavour it as wiry, proportional strength, take Expertise if available, and don't try to get everything under the same SAD umbrella.
From what I've seen, parkour is like climbing ... there are very few experts who just aren't that strong. That's not to say muscle-bound weight lifters. But certainly well into "very athletic" strength range.

But the main thing is I'd classify parkour as is a combination of Str (Athletics) checks for climbing and jumping with Balance checks, flips, and other acrobatic stunts that are Dex (Acrobatics). With some crossing back and forth. That said, I don't see any reason why a person trained in parkour couldn't make a combination of Str (Acrobatics) for climbs & jumps and Dex (Acrobatics) for balance and stunts. Acrobatics could certainly represent "parkour training", and allowing switching in Str for the climbing/jumping part makes sense to me.

It's just Dex (Acrobatics) for climbing and jumping that doesn't make sense to me. Personally. Nothing in Acrobatics or Dex implies either should work for those.

[Maxilian]

Question says it all. We're pretty well into a campaign, but the skill has not come up. At all.

So what are we doing wrong? How can I (as a player) make use of this skill. Frankly at this point I annoyed with myself for choosing it over Athletics. For a monk, which seems rather wrong.

(no one has tried to shove me, other people have been the targets of such attacks, however Athletics seems just as useful for resisting those attacks)

In many cases that you use Athletics you can also use Acrobatics (different forms but same result most of the time), so its basically... Do i prefer a DEX based skill or STR based skill?

[Maxilian]

Athletics.

Agreed. But from a DM perspective, it's important to keep in mind that if you're required to make a check for any acrobatic maneuver, then players will do them less, not more. They should only happen when the outcome is in doubt.

Similar to how Climbing, Jumping and Swimming don't require an Athletics check, you just do them. Unless it's tricky ...

I think Jumping and Climbing could use Acrobatics, IMHO it depends what you wish to archive, for example, jumping.

-You could use Acrobatics, to jump from a wall to the other (letting you get to highter ground) or when you jump and want to crab to something that is a little bit tricky)

-You could use Acrobatics while climbing when you fall and you need to rapidly grab to something before falling to your dead

[Zalabim]

There's also a DC 10 acrobatics check to stay standing when you jump into difficult terrain. Why would you jump into difficult terrain? Because you're jumping over more difficult terrain. If you have great acrobatics, you can skip across the top of the ice slick left by a sleet storm or do a one-two hop across a puddle of grease, though in such cases you'd still have to make the save as well. You just wouldn't have to spend double movement for the difficult terrain, since you're jumping.

So you can sort of use Acrobatics to move more quickly through difficult terrain.

[Nifft]

In my games, you can roll either Str (Athletics) or Dex (Acrobatics) to make a Jump check.

Str (Athletics) would be jumping and then landing with a huge thud, the mighty thews of your oak-thick legs soaking up the tremendous impact.

Dex (Acrobatics) would be jumping and then rolling to defray the momentum, or softening your fall by landing on a nearby soft-headed lout and quickly leaping out of his reach.

If you have both trained, then you might sometimes get Advantage on Jump checks, but not often.

[Tanarii]

You aren't supposed to roll a check at all, unless it's exception jump circumstances. Trying to jump really far (ie more than your Str in feet), of pull off a stunt mid jump, are given as examples.

I don't see how jumping further can be Dex, other than the their Theif special class feature.

But depending on the type of stunt you're pulling off mid-air, that just cries out for Dex (Athletics) or even Dex (Acrobatics).

Personally I've also called for Str Athletics when trying to grab something at the end of a jump and hold on. And Dex Acrobatics when trying to stick a tricky landing, but that one is obviously 'balance' IMO.

[LordVonDerp]

Athletics.. Or acrobatics, if the player so chooses.



Agreed. But from a DM perspective, it's important to keep in mind that if you're required to make a check for any acrobatic maneuver, then players will do them less, not more. They should only happen when the outcome is in doubt.

Similar to how Climbing, Jumping and Swimming don't require an Athletics check, you just do them. Unless it's tricky ...

Yeah.

[WhiteEagle88]

You can use it proactively in the Make Rulings Not Rules spirit of 5e. "I step on the table and somersault over the vampire to stab it from behind!"
If the DM is cool, he'll let you make some kind of Acrobatics check for Advantage on your next attack or something like that.

This is what I'd do. I once had a halfling rogue run up the back of a human party member, springboard off him, flipping over the enemy to land behind him to set up flanking bonuses(3.5).

[Tanarii]

Or acrobatics, if the player so chooses.Intersting. I've always seen 5e run as DM choice on what a check is, not player.

[Specter]

You know UA? We need one of those on skills.

[Sigreid]

I'd say what you are doing wrong is not saying "I want to try to use my acrobatics to XXX". With 5e We're back to make cool stuff up and go for it instead of long lists of DCs.

"I want to use acrobatics to swing through the trees like Tarzan."
"I want to use acrobatics to do a hand spring into this guy to knock him down because I think he's stronger than me."
"I want to use acrobatics with Timmy ti have him launch me over the wall like a Chinese acrobat."

The list is limited by your reasonable imagination and your DM's ability to roll with the calls when needed.

[Occasional Sage]

Intersting. I've always seen 5e run as DM choice on what a check is, not player.

I give an initial stat/skill for what players want to do, but it's understood (and I usually say) that they can pitch something else. As long as it's believable, I'm almost always good.

[Tanarii]

Since it's an awesome article and it's relevant:
http://angrydm.com/2013/04/adjudicate-actions-like-a-boss/


I'd say what you are doing wrong is not saying "I want to try to use my acrobatics to XXX". With 5e We're back to make cool stuff up and go for it instead of long lists of DCs.This seems like dangerous advice. IMO, it's best as a player to tell the DM what you want to do and how you are trying to do it. Not what check you are trying to use. If this flies with your DM more power too you, but I've yet to play at a 5e table where this is acceptable.

Of course, at this point, it could just be backlash against how common it was when the skill system was first introduced. But "I roll diplomacy to persuade the guard" seems to have become a passé way to play at this point.


I give an initial stat/skill for what players want to do, but it's understood (and I usually say) that they can pitch something else. As long as it's believable, I'm almost always good.
Now this is reasonable, although it does seem like a way to drag the game out with arguments.

[Sigreid]

Since it's an awesome article and it's relevant:
http://angrydm.com/2013/04/adjudicate-actions-like-a-boss/

This seems like dangerous advice. IMO, it's best as a player to tell the DM what you want to do and how you are trying to do it. Not what check you are trying to use. If this flies with your DM more power too you, but I've yet to play at a 5e table where this is acceptable.

Of course, at this point, it could just be backlash against how common it was when the skill system was first introduced. But "I roll diplomacy to persuade the guard" seems to have become a passé way to play at this point.


The DM still gets to set any DC and can say something can't flat work, or that you'll use another skill or ability roll. I don't think there's anything wrong with saying I want to try to use my X skill to do Y. All you're really doing is taking some of the burden from the DM to come up with a reason the skill is useful by making suggestions.

[Occasional Sage]

Now this is reasonable, although it does seem like a way to drag the game out with arguments.

It's not that common, and rarely takes more than ten or 15 seconds to discuss.

[BW022]

Cases when it would typically be used...

1. Avoiding grapples.
2. Balance checks -- ice, snow, slippery stairs, oil slicks, balance beams, tight ropes, etc.
3. Squeezing through narrow openings -- bars,
4. Escaping certain bonds -- shackles, ropes, etc. -- or fighting or tacking actions when in certain bonds.
5. Swinging from ropes, reaching the reins of a fast moving carriage,
6. Fighting or tacking actions on a pitching ship, canoe, log, tree branch, etc.
7. Various spell effects which cause slipping or balance checks.
8. Jumping from reasonable heights and landing on your feet.
9. Performances or earning money involving tumbling (i.e. most circus acts)
10. Other actions as permitted by your DM.
etc.


Question says it all. We're pretty well into a campaign, but the skill has not come up. At all.

So what are we doing wrong? How can I (as a player) make use of this skill. Frankly at this point I annoyed with myself for choosing it over Athletics. For a monk, which seems rather wrong.

(no one has tried to shove me, other people have been the targets of such attacks, however Athletics seems just as useful for resisting those attacks)

Not all skills are encountered equally frequently, or equally valuable when used. Most characters go out of their way to avoid putting themselves in positions where they need to make acrobatics checks, simply as failing is often insanely dangerous.

However, like any skill which isn't encountered frequently... that also typically means that only you can do it. Characters are more likely to encounter athletics, so you'll often have multiple characters able to climb, jump, or swim. So... when you encounter a narrow ledge, an ice slope, or are tied up... chances are you character would be the only one able to get past that encounter (and/or help others do so).

Ways you can use it more...

1. Use spells or abilities which cause these. Grease and area and then fight in it.
2. Put yourself in situations where balance is important. Fight on roof tops, swing from ropes, etc.
3. Try actions and ask your DM if X is possible. For example, "Can I tumble under the table to avoid the opportunity attack or get cover from it?"

However, accept that it isn't as common as other skills.