Can you tumble and charge at the same time?

[alex1g]

Can you tumble and charge at the same time? Got a player who insist that it can be done.

[CharonsHelper]

Not normally - but there are a few abilities which let you do it.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Not normally - but there are a few abilities which let you do it.
Are we sure? Charge says that you can't charge through a square containing an enemy, but I don't see anything preventing you from tumbling "as part of [the] normal movement..."

[Zanos]

I was one of the people saying you couldn't and the core of it was this:


Action
Not applicable. Tumbling is part of movement, so a Tumble check is part of a move action.

A charge is a full round action, not a move action, so you can't tumble. That's how I read it.

[flappeercraft]

Since RAW is covered and I can't argue with it due to lack of evidence I will go for RAI. RAI you shouldn't as there literally is a class feature on Drunken Master, Stagger which is made to make a tumble check to avoid AOO's during charge and move without the straight line requirement which implies that both are not possible without it.

[NoAnonimo]

From Rules Compendium:



Tumbling during a Charge
You can tumble during a charge, as long as you continue to meet all other criteria for making a charge before, during, and after tumbling.


All other Criteria:



To charge, you must move at least 10 feet

If any line from your starting space to the ending space passes through a square that blocks movement, is difficult terrain, or contains a creature (not a helpless one), you can’t charge.

You can’t charge if the ending space is occupied or blocked.

[Zanos]

Yeah, looks like it's pretty clear cut in the RC.

[Crake]

I was one of the people saying you couldn't and the core of it was this:



A charge is a full round action, not a move action, so you can't tumble. That's how I read it.

Yeah, it's a little unclear there, because it says that tumble is part of movement, and then goes on to say that it's part of a move action, when it would be more correct to say it's part of any action that involves movement, which does include charges, as clarified in RC.

[Psyren]

Oh, but we can't use the RC entry, because there was a premium PHB released that still has the "move action" language in it. Clearly WotC intended that version.

Snark aside, RC has this covered.

[Zanos]

Oh, but we can't use the RC entry, because there was a premium PHB released that still has the "move action" language in it. Clearly WotC intended that version.
You forgot to mention that the RC doesn't apply because it isn't a "primary source document" and/or because it isn't free and therefore doesn't count as errata. :smalltongue:

[Gruftzwerg]

Since RAW is covered and I can't argue with it due to lack of evidence I will go for RAI. RAI you shouldn't as there literally is a class feature on Drunken Master, Stagger which is made to make a tumble check to avoid AOO's during charge and move without the straight line requirement which implies that both are not possible without it.

The tumble part of Stagger is even more special. Stagger has a single Tumble DC 15 check for any number of enemies. While regular tumble adds +2DC after the first and you need to check every enemy separately one after the other.

Imho Stagger doesn't gives us the info how it would be normally. Reverse engineering Stagger doesn't provide any info sadly.

[Sleven]

The Rules Compendium isn't even necessary to come to the proper conclusion.


Charge

Charging is a special full-round action that allows you to move up to twice your speed and attack during the action. However, it carries tight restrictions on how you can move.

Movement During a Charge
...

It then goes on to detail the restrictions on how you can move. Tumble is not listed as something that would prevent you from charging. Furthermore, movement and move actions that fall within the given restrictions are explicitly part of the charge's "special full-round action".

We can also see that our turn's standard and move action are part of the charge, because we are allowed to take them in lieu of a full-round action when we would otherwise be restricted from doing so:


If you are able to take only a standard action or a move action on your turn, you can still charge, but you are only allowed to move up to your speed (instead of up to double your speed). You can’t use this option unless you are restricted to taking only a standard action or move action on your turn.

We also know that we are allowed to jump as part of a charge action. In fact, a significant number of feats have been built around giving bonuses for doing so. Jump checks are considered move actions in the same way Tumble checks are:


Action

None. A Jump check is included in your movement, so it is part of a move action.

This is the same as Tumble:


Action

Not applicable. Tumbling is part of movement, so a Tumble check is part of a move action.

[Fouredged Sword]

I did not know this. I made a incorrect call in a previous game. Thank you very much for showing me this RAW. I will let the player know.

[Zanos]

A move action and movement aren't the same thing. You can draw a weapon as a move action, but no movement occurs.

[Fouredged Sword]

A move action and movement aren't the same thing. You can draw a weapon as a move action, but no movement occurs.

I somewhat wish 3.5 went with a major, standard, minor, swift terminology. You get one minor, one standard, and one swift action each round. A major action takes up both the minor and standard action. A standard action can be used to preform a minor action.

The use of full round and move as action types confuses the fact that actions can be take along side a full round action (such as a swift action) and not all move actions are movement.

[Deophaun]

A basic principle of reading the rules: when the reasoning is presented to explain a rule, the reasoning is there to expand the rule to other cases where that reasoning would also follow.

[KillianHawkeye]

A move action and movement aren't the same thing. You can draw a weapon as a move action, but no movement occurs.

Drawing a weapon is a "move-equivalent action", which means it takes up your Move action but it isn't an actual "Move" action.

And now I'm experiencing that thing where I've read and typed the word "move" so many times that it stopped feeling like a real word. :smallconfused:

[AnimeTheCat]

Drawing a weapon is a "move-equivalent action", which means it takes up your Move action but it isn't an actual "Move" action.

And now I'm experiencing that thing where I've read and typed the word "move" so many times that it stopped feeling like a real word. :smallconfused:

Don't forget though, if you have +1 BAB you can draw a weapon as a free action in conjunction with a move action.

[KillianHawkeye]

Don't forget though, if you have +1 BAB you can draw a weapon as a free action in conjunction with a move action.

That is really neither here nor there....

[Gruftzwerg]

a Tumble check is part of a move action

The problem is the defined keyword "move action". It's a special action type and full-round actions don't include it. They are 2 different thing.
If the rule text would say "is part of your (other actions that involve) movement." it would work, but that ain't the chase here.
Full-Round-Action doesn't qualify for "move action" by RAW, be it a charge or whatever else you use as FR-Action.

Imho, if we only take the "tumble rule text" and than look up the action type rules , you are normally not allowed to tumble while charging.

lets look at Jump & Leap Attack to compare.

"Jump"-skill has the same language as Tumble (about action type..), and if we take a look at Leap Attack:

...
This attack must follow all the normal rules for using the Jump skill and for making a charge, except that you ignore rough terrain in any squares you jump over.
emphasis added.
Note that the Jump & Charge are counted separate here and not together like "follow all the normal rules for jumping while charging". Further, if you could always jump while charging (without Leap Attack), why shouldn't you be able to jump over difficult terrain without Leap Attack (cause LA talks about it as exception to the normal rules).

We need to recall what "normal" Charge does:
You take the shortest and "fastest" way to your opponent. You may not choose to do any unnecessary steps, which I translate to no unnecessary movement (like jumping / tumbling), cause that would be the fastest & shortest route.

Leap Attack gives you the specific exception that you may jump.

So you would need an exception like Stagger to be able to tumble while charging.

[OldTrees1]

Action:
Not applicable. Tumbling is part of movement, so a Tumble check is part of a move action.

Action type of Tumble? Not Applicable.
Time you can use Tumble? Tumbling is part of movement.
Example of Tumble? If you use your move action for its default purpose(movement), you can tumble as part of that action.

Clearly while you can use a Move Action to do movement and thus tumble, it is not the only source of movement AND the rules are clear that you can tumble as part of movement.

[Psyren]

Two things:

1) This is an exception-based rules system, so you need a 1st-party source to say you can do X before you can do X (to avoid invoking Air Bud Clause). In this case, a source (RC) has done so quite clearly, so the baseline is that you can.

2) A separate source (PHB) says you tumble during a move action. So now we come to the only question that matters - do these sources contradict each other? My answer is that they don't - PHB does not say you can only Tumble during a move. Therefore it is simply listing another scenario where you can tumble. You can tumble as part of a move action. You can also tumble as part of a charge. These are not mutually exclusive; you can do both in the same combat, and even in the same round if you have bonus actions (e.g. the Hustle psionic power.)

Therefore my ruling is that Tumbling during a charge is unequivocally fine.

[NoAnonimo]

Therefore my ruling is that Tumbling during a charge is unequivocally fine.

Thank you. Idk why you would keep arguin against it. RC is preety clear. I agree with your explanation, and think maybe it was necesary to explicit this all.