# CMD too low?



## Ymdar (Mar 10, 2011)

We are about to hit a level in our game when our monk will according to him "aggro enemies on him and then trip them all over".

This was the time I started to look up the CMD. And then I realized combat maneuvers are pretty powerful since only rings or protections or some specialized protection spells (mainly from the cleric list) increase the CMD. And even these increases are low compared to the vast magic items allowing the increase of AC. 

Since you guys must have played the game longer than me, I think by now you surely have found some solutions, or experienced that the CMD is not so low.


----------



## frankthedm (Mar 10, 2011)

_At 3rd level, a monk uses his monk level in place of his base attack bonus when calculating his Combat Maneuver Bonus._

Don't Add Both.

Maneuver feats only give +2 now, not +4.

_CMB = Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + special size modifier

CMD = 10 + Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + *Dexterity modifier* + special size modifier + miscellaneous modifier_

EDIT: Not many  “Agro” mechanics in Pathfinder that I know of.  If the monk makes it inconvenient for  the foes to get him, someone else is attacked. And if it is a BIG monster...

_You can only trip an opponent who is no more than one size category larger than you._

And plenty of monsters are immune to tripping. Pathfinder actually calls this out rather than leave it up to guesswork.  

_Some creatures—such as oozes, creatures without legs, and flying creatures—cannot be tripped._


----------



## Mojo_Rat (Mar 11, 2011)

the level of opponents cmd will vary ALOT depending on what you are fighting. large quadrupeds can have a high trip cmd. but really don't sweat it. if the monk is tripping a d grappling people he is doing his job. my lvl 9 monk has 24 to trip but 15 to grapple and 13 to do other stuff.  a lvl 9 fightter might have 25 to 30 or more depending, but this is what monks don really well.


----------



## Tovec (Mar 11, 2011)

TO frankthedm: I think the original poster was saying that items, abilities, spells, etc. to increase CMD seem outpaced by items, abilities, spells, etc. that increase AC.

I agree to a point. Monks have a good ability to adapt and do certain actions. I'm hoping to change this issue in my next game by instituting point buy and making sure to check how long each action takes.

Overall I don't know how to fix the problem, beyond possibly taking monk's Wis to CMD away.


----------



## DumbPaladin (Mar 11, 2011)

Are people really experiencing a problem with MONKS shutting down a game?  It's easily one of the weaker classes in Pathfinder (as it was in 3.5).  I call Shenanigans.


----------



## Borthos (Mar 11, 2011)

I don't know about your games, but in all the games I've ran/played the monk has been a very big nuisance for the DM.  One was because he got lucky with rolls (and the sheer number of attacks helped too) and critted so often it wasn't even funny.  They were all legit, so the DM couldn't really say "No, it doesn't count."  

The other was just because the player was being crazy, jumping around, and while he didn't do much damage, he could lock down two or three guys at once tripping and relying on AoOs.  

The monk isn't the most optimum class, but it's just fun and annoying


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Mar 11, 2011)

We haven't made a lot of use of CMB/CMD in our nascent PFRPG game yet.  What we have seen -- Acrobatics rolls to avoid AoOs -- have been instances where CMD is _too high_.

Technically, I think the "10" part of "10+CMD" is too high, but still.

My max-ranks rogue fails these against level-appropriate enemies about 50 to 60 percent.


----------



## Ymdar (Mar 11, 2011)

Well, if you guys didn't experience a balance issue with the CMD being overall low compared to the AC while almost no magic item can increase it, then all is well.


----------



## Alzrius (Mar 11, 2011)

In my experience, pretty much everything that adds a bonus to AC - so long as it isn't an armor, shield, or natural armor bonus - is going to increase CMD as well (emphasis mine):



> *Combat Maneuver Defense:* Each character and creature has a Combat Maneuver Defense (or CMD) that represents its ability to resist combat maneuvers. A creature's CMD is determined using the following formula:
> 
> *CMD = 10 + Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + Dexterity modifier + special size modifier*
> 
> The special size modifier for a creature's Combat Maneuver Defense is as follows: Fine –8, Diminutive –4, Tiny –2, Small –1, Medium +0, Large +1, Huge +2, Gargantuan +4, Colossal +8. Some feats and abilities grant a bonus to your CMD when resisting specific maneuvers. A creature can also add any circumstance, deflection, dodge, insight, luck, morale, profane, and sacred bonuses to AC to its CMD. Any penalties to a creature's AC also apply to its CMD. A flat-footed creature does not add its Dexterity bonus to its CMD.




Between that and the Defensive Combat Training feat, raising a character's CMD shouldn't be too hard.


----------



## Thazar (Mar 11, 2011)

You also need to keep in mind that BAB plays into the CMD.  So you have built in increases right there that is not present in AC.  For most classes and in most cases hitting a CMD is pretty hard to do over all.  Monks are very good at tripping, but they will still find many bad guys that they will either fail at even before the dice is rolled or have a small chance of success.  Other times they will make the bad guy eat dirt.

As in all things sometimes the player character will shine... others he will have little to do if he puts all of his focus into one type of attack.  

Also remember that things that are built to fight well will usually out fight the things that do not fight well.  A wizard is EASY to trip at any level... a fighter is hard, and a giant is VERY hard.


----------



## Tovec (Mar 12, 2011)

Jeff Wilder said:


> We haven't made a lot of use of CMB/CMD in our nascent PFRPG game yet.  What we have seen -- Acrobatics rolls to avoid AoOs -- have been instances where CMD is _too high_.
> 
> Technically, I think the "10" part of "10+CMD" is too high, but still.
> 
> My max-ranks rogue fails these against level-appropriate enemies about 50 to 60 percent.




I haven't found this to be true at all in my games with both a monk and a rogue having acrobatics. Both seem quite capable of getting through enemy squares or out of AoOs with the check quite simply. If they failed about half the time I'd be quite happy actually. It means with hard work and dedication you have a decent chance of avoiding something that would ALWAYS hit everyone else. It doesn't mean you have a PERFECT chance of avoiding the thing that ALWAYS hits EVERYONE else.

I will have to playtest further but I found the tumble (acrobatics) check in 3.5 was far too easy, any tumbling character I had could almost always get away. Now its a little harder so I'm happy.


----------



## Celtavian (Mar 12, 2011)

*re*



DumbPaladin said:


> Are people really experiencing a problem with MONKS shutting down a game?  It's easily one of the weaker classes in Pathfinder (as it was in 3.5).  I call Shenanigans.




Is the monk weak in campaigns that use point buy? Is that it? Because it requires more high ability scores to be effective.

We roll stats in our campaigns. And if someone is lucky enough to get four good stats, the monk is a pretty nasty class. I can see the monk being weak using the recommended 15 point buy system. But if you get three or four decent stats rolling a character, the monk is a dangerous class.

Though the monk is sort of like wizard. Starts off slow, starts to really shine as you get to higher level. I'd say past ten the monk starts coming into their own.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Mar 12, 2011)

Tovec said:


> I haven't found this to be true at all in my games with both a monk and a rogue having acrobatics. Both seem quite capable of getting through enemy squares or out of AoOs with the check quite simply. If they failed about half the time I'd be quite happy actually.



In my case, my Dex is 17.  At 2nd level, I have +8 to Acrobatics.

The bad guy was Fighter 3, Str 16, Dex 14 for a CMD of 18.  Moving at half-speed, I need to roll a 10 (55%).  Moving at full speed, I must roll a natural 20 (5%).  (Both numbers assume no difficult terrain or other bad guys pushing the DCs higher, of course.)

You're right, that 55% isn't _too_ bad, and I agree that Tumble was too easy in 3.5.  But that +10 for moving at full speed effectively means it's all but impossible to do against level-appropriate bad guys.

But that's not a problem with CMD, but rather with the full-speed modifier.


----------



## DanMcS (Mar 13, 2011)

Jeff Wilder said:


> You're right, that 55% isn't _too_ bad, and I agree that Tumble was too easy in 3.5.  But that +10 for moving at full speed effectively means it's all but impossible to do against level-appropriate bad guys.
> 
> But that's not a problem with CMD, but rather with the full-speed modifier.




That's totally intentional; you tumble at half speed by default. Allowing you to do it at full speed with a hefty DC increase is intended to let you show off against mooks, not against equivalent opponents.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Mar 13, 2011)

DanMcS said:


> That's totally intentional; you tumble at half speed by default. Allowing you to do it at full speed with a hefty DC increase is intended to let you show off against mooks, not against equivalent opponents.



If that's the intention, it fails.  (Again, because of the +10.)  60% to succeed against mooks isn't "showing off," it's "a serious risk of being clobbered by a mook."

And 30% against level-appropriate bad guys (which is what it would be at +5 instead of the 5% it is at +10) isn't showing off, either.  It's "an actual chance."

+10 for tumbling at full speed is too high.  (It's only +5 to tumble _through_ an enemy!)  Like I said, it effectively means "this is almost impossible" (5%) whereas it would be better if it meant "this is difficult, but possible" (30%).


----------



## Tovec (Mar 13, 2011)

Firstly I love how off topic we got.

Secondly, a 30% chance of getting HIT by a mook. A 30% chance at 2nd level. I can't picture many 2nd level characters that are supposed to unilaterally get away from most everyone for a simple roll. It is a +10 because then it gives some difficulty (not much IMHO) for higher level characters to fail trying to show off.
It's doing something that untrained people Can't do, it shouldn't be overly easy just because you happen to have some skill points in it.
Why should avoiding someone's swing and tumbling away from them be any easier than forging a sword or finding out a moderately difficult whatsit. Jeff, you are giving a response for what a 2nd level character can do with a 17 Dex. Picture a 5th with an 18, what's the chance to fail then?


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Mar 14, 2011)

You realize, also, that this isn't a change from 3.5 at all, right?

3.5's Tumble rules also had you moving at half speed while tumbling, with a +10 to the DC if you wanted to go at full speed.

And you misread DanMcS's point, Jeff.  At the level you are currently at, you aren't able to show off vs. mooks, so you can't reasonably expect to hit the mook+10 DC.  You, in the grand scheme of things, are pretty mooky yourself at this point.

Rather, once you hit a slightly higher level, you'll be able to routinely hit the mook+10 DC, at which point you can show off.  Against level-appropriate opponents, however, there'll always be a chance for failure - unlike 3.5, wherein Tumbling pretty quickly became an auto-success against anything.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Mar 14, 2011)

Tovec said:


> Jeff, you are giving a response for what a 2nd level character can do with a 17 Dex. Picture a 5th with an 18, what's the chance to fail then?



Are you missing where I keep saying "level appropriate"?

At 5th level, my chances against level-appropriate enemies -- mooks and "real" bad guys -- will be approximately the same.  Too low, because of the +10.

And of course it's a change from 3.5, because 3.5 used static DCs.  Pathfinder uses a scaling DC.  With a static DC, +10 was too high at low levels (assuming any reasonable chance at success is desired), appropriate for a while, and then too low.  With a scaling DC, +10 is _too high_ (assuming any reasonable chance at success is desired).  Always.  Because it scales.

Don't get me wrong ... I'm in favor of the scaling DC.  It's just that the DC was made to scale without the modifiers to the DC being taken into account, which, as a result, means that tumbling at full speed is all but impossible against level-appropriate bad guys, and has a low chance of success against level-appropriate mooks.

Maybe that _was_ intentional; I dunno.  If so, I think it was a poor design decision.  I think it's more likely that it just didn't get careful consideration.  But, then again, maybe it was considered; they did, after all change the +10 for tumbling through an enemy to only +5, and I assume they did so because it was all but impossible to perform the action otherwise ... you know, against level-appropriate enemies.


----------



## DanMcS (Mar 14, 2011)

Jeff Wilder said:


> Are you missing where I keep saying "level appropriate"?
> 
> At 5th level, my chances against level-appropriate enemies -- mooks and "real" bad guys -- will be approximately the same.  Too low, because of the +10.




We hear "level appropriate", but you're missing what we mean by "mooks". You're not supposed to be able to tumble at full speed past level-appropriate enemies. By mooks, we mean, "not level-appropriate". If you're 10th level, and you're going past a CR 6 opponent, your odds will be pretty good.


----------



## Mojo_Rat (Mar 15, 2011)

Celtavian said:
			
		

> Is the monk weak in campaigns that use point buy? Is that it? Because it requires more high ability scores to be effective.
> 
> We roll stats in our campaigns. And if someone is lucky enough to get four good stats, the monk is a pretty nasty class. I can see the monk being weak using the recommended 15 point buy system. But if you get three or four decent stats rolling a character, the monk is a dangerous class.
> 
> Though the monk is sort of like wizard. Starts off slow, starts to really shine as you get to higher level. I'd say past ten the monk starts coming into their own.




we just finished a game at lvl 10 my monk had 84 hps 27 base ac (28 with Mage armor ki dodge to 32) normally 4 attacks 16 16 11 11 1d8 + 7 PA for -3 +4 cmb 14  grapple 16 trip with temple sword of 25. short of a giant 4 legged dwarf I could trip it.

or second to last battle after our witch dispelled anti life shield I grappled and choked out a lvl 11 or 12cleric I don't know why he didn't have freedom of movement but I gues felt anti life shield was enough.

really while there were some issues with the character big main end bad guys like dragons would shred me but minions or secondary melee bad guys or casters were easily handleable.


----------



## Tovec (Mar 15, 2011)

DanMcS pretty much summed up what I was saying Jeff.
However can you please run the numbers on the level 5 with 18 dex for me?

If it works out the odds are a little better (as I expect they would be) then great, if they're somehow the same or worse then I _might_ concede that point.

Mostly I don't think two classes should be able to run away, in a unique way from any creature with all kinds of benefits for doing so when all the rest of the classes against that same creature can't. Now I'm not suggesting that these classes don't fill a role nor am I saying that it isn't cool being able to do it. I think its silly that a Monk (in 3.5 or PF) can tumble away from someone so easily when a fighter who is just as highly trained gets whacked because the fighter has more HP to get whacked with. I have found very little real world application of why tumbling was created the way it was in the first place but I don't mind it. I did think 3.5 made it FAR too easy and PF made it harder. I also know that the few characters I have seen who are still capable of tumbling do so quite effectively.

So please, once again, run the numbers on a level 5 with 18 dex in the same way you did a level 2 with 17. I somehow think those extra 4 points will matter when at best a fighter who is scaling the same amount will get 3. That isn't including the bonuses such as feats, skill-bonus abilities and items you can get to bump a SKILL role when a fighter can bump their CMD by .... um... getting a new level and increasing their physicals?


----------



## Mojo_Rat (Mar 15, 2011)

sorry forgot to add the monk I was talking about was 20 pt buy 14 14 14 101410. after race and gear 18 18 14 10 16 10. I feel ALOT if the negative views of monks are un warranted.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Mar 15, 2011)

Tovec said:


> However can you please run the numbers on the level 5 with 18 dex for me?



Sure.  That gives the rogue a +12.

Fighter 6, Str 16, Dex 14 (it would be fair if the fighter gained a stat bump, too, but let's ignore that), so a CMD of 21.

To tumble at full speed away from this fighter, I have to roll a natural 19 or 20.

_And_ this ignores any magic items that apply to CMD, such as a _ring of protection +1_ and it ignores any CMD-boosting feats the feat-rich fighter may have (which includes things like Dodge, BTW).  It also ignores any Acrobatics-boosts I might have, but those are significantly less likely.

It also assume "level-appropriate" to be "CR equal to level," while in practice it would be quite reasonable if that fighter were 8th level ... and I would have literally _no chance_ of tumbling away.

Note, BTW, that we're not talking about an offensive maneuver like disarming or tripping; I have no problem accepting that I should have very little chance of succeeding at those.  But giving a rogue almost no chance to succeed at a very roguish, primarily defensive, ability, against a level-appropriate enemy, was a mistake.

A 10 percent chance to succeed (at best) at this is simply too low.  All I'm arguing for is that the modifier should be +5, which translates to a 35 percent chance (at best).


----------



## Tovec (Mar 15, 2011)

A. They now have a higher chance of tumbling away at FULL SPEED. They now do it on a 19 or 20 instead of just 20 in only 3 levels.

B. That doesn't mean they can't try and move full speed, it means that they should roll to go half speed most of the time. Unless of course tumbling from a wizard or a mook.

C. Ring of Protection and Dodge eh?
Ring of Protection:
This ring offers continual magical protection in the form of a
deflection bonus of +1 to +5 to AC.

Dodge:
You gain a +1 dodge bonus to your AC. A
condition that makes you lose your Dex bonus to AC also
makes you lose the benefits of this feat.

I must have missed where these give bonuses to CMD. Unno like in the monk's AC Bonus (Ex):
When unarmored and unencumbered,
the monk adds his Wisdom bonus (if any) to his AC *and his
CMD*. In addition, a monk gains a +1 bonus to AC *and CMD*
at 4th level. This bonus increases by 1 for every four monk
levels thereafter, up to a maximum of +5 at 20th level.

Monk's AC bonus also works _nearly _all the time (few exceptions) where the dodge bonus and ring don't. Which after all is the point of this thread.


----------



## Jadeite (Mar 15, 2011)

> A creature can also add any circumstance, deflection, dodge, insight, luck, morale, profane, and sacred bonuses to AC to its CMD.




It's mentioned in the monk entry because the monk's bonus to AC is untyped.


----------



## Tovec (Mar 15, 2011)

Jadeite said:


> > A creature can also add any circumstance, deflection, dodge,  insight, luck, morale, profane, and sacred bonuses to AC to its CMD.
> 
> 
> 
> It's mentioned in the monk entry because the monk's bonus to AC is untyped.




Cool, where is that quote from? That dramatically changes my view on this subject.

*EDIT:*
Found it, what do you know.

*Combat Maneuver Defense
*CMD = 10 + BAB + STR + DEX + SIZE + MISC
*Miscellaneous
*A creature can also add any circumstance, deflection, dodge,  insight,  luck, morale, profane, and sacred bonuses to AC to its CMD.


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Mar 16, 2011)

CMD section, oddly enough.


----------



## Tovec (Mar 16, 2011)

So I've reread the CMD section as well as this entire thread Jeff and I now understand your point more fully. Yes it does seem to scale really well from level to level. I know there are still a lot of reasonably cheap magic items that would level the playing field at higher levels but I do truly understand your point.

I don't agree with it but I understand it. I think my comments before about being able to run away from lower level enemies seems fine and should be easier, running away from higher or same level ones should be decent to hard depending on class and level.
Yes it is part of the rogue or monk mechanic but it was too easy in 3.5 to do at higher levels making it a godly power if you had tumble. It is now slightly harder but more classes are capable of doing it with the change to class skills getting +3. I'm okay with its current level as it is. If I find out later that it gets overpowered or underpowered then I am more than willing on changing or houseruling something at that point.
I still think monks are quite powerful in PF due to increased BAB and combination of effects into Combat Maneuvers. I'm glad it was finally pointed out that everyone else gets a lot of other options to CMD. Wouldn't this still mean a monk is advantaged - in being able to get those same spells cast upon them or being able to pick up the same items the fighter gets? Plus being able to add their WIS to CMD when a fighter can't, but I digress.


----------



## Kaisoku (Mar 16, 2011)

Not putting any ranks and having no Dex bonus = Not good at tumbling at all.

Putting ranks into Acrobatics and having a decent Dex bonus = Good at acrobatics in general.

Full ranks, high Dex, Skill Focus (Acrobatics) = Focused on Acrobatics.

Full ranks, pumped Dex, Skill Focus (Acrobatics), Acrobatic, Boots of Elvenkind, and Elixir of Tumbling (different circumstance, so it would likely stack) = Ridiculously (unnecessarily) focused on Acrobatics.


A person has a lot of options when it comes to how "level appropriate" they are.

Boots of Elvenkind are fairly common around 5th level (current Kingmaker game, the rogue just picked these up). Skill focus is nothing to laugh at, due to the doubled bonus at 10 ranks.

Currently, our party Rogue (at 5th level) has 20 Dex (16 pb, +2 racial, +2 magic item), 5 ranks in the skill, and Boots of Elvenkind.
If he were not bow focused, and more concerned about moving through dangerous spaces, he'd have Skill Focus as well.

That's a +21 modifier. Looking a the "monsters by CR", the average CMD at CR 5 is 23 (if we round up). That's a 90% success chance for fairly minor focus in "not getting hit while moving" (one feat and one magic item). If you want to do that at full speed, it's about 40% chance (against level appropriate).
The guy with an elixir of tumbling and the extra +2 feat would have no chance of failure, even at full speed.. which makes sense for focusing so much, and using a limited resource (potion).

Now, I have a fundamental thematic objection to using CMD, as you aren't really "attacking" but "avoiding" with a tumble. So if we need to have an opposed check at all (I still think tumbling difficulty should be about leaving yourself open, not opponent's skill), then I'd rather it was based on CMB, or maybe BAB + Dex alone, emulating the Bluff-as-feint concept.

--

Regarding the OP.

There are a number of limitations in place regarding combat maneuvers already. So if someone wants to pump resources (feats, etc) into being good at one of them, it's a good idea that it'll come into play fairly often.

Note that most combat maneuvers aren't death sentences. A grapple takes a while to get into a position where you can permanently remove someone from combat (it takes rounds to get to pinning with a rope situation), and while he's doing it, the grappler is kind of out of combat too (and more vulnerable).
Tripping isn't the be-all end-all, as there's a number of methods of removing the problems of being prone (no trip locking! you can't trip someone as they stand up, the AoO will have to be for something other than tripping).

As for actually bringing up the CMD number:

There's the Defensive Combat Training feat for those who aren't full BAB classes, and the Dodge feat grants a +1 Dodge bonus to AC, so also CMD. The mobility feat grants a +4 dodge bonus to AC when provoking an AoO for moving, so if you move out of threatened space and that giant wants to grapple or trip you, you have an additional +4 to you CMD against that.

The APG has Boneless Leather, a special magical armor that (among a laundry list of bonuses), grants +5 to your CMD.
There's also the teamwork feat Coordinated Defense, which gives a +2 bonus to CMD if next to your ally who has this feat (cavaliers and inquisitors having greater advantage of this). Oh, and it's +4 if the enemy is larger.
Rangers can get a feat for a bonus to CMD against favored enemies (and have a spell to treat a target as a favored enemy, so nice combo there).

There's also an innumerable amount of racial and class features (especially with archetypes and racial traits swapping) that give bonuses to specific CMD checks.
I haven't even checked spells, but off the top of my head, Protection from Evil grants a +2 deflection bonus that would count.

It's not as straight forward as AC, but there's a lot of support for the Combat Maneuver mechanics. I think this is why, when all things are considered and stacked up, it's not such a problem in game.
And even with all these ways of boosting CMD, the guy who focused on Tripping can still get his chance to shine. As it should be.


----------



## sheadunne (Mar 16, 2011)

You don't have to tumble for the entire movement, just the first five feet to get away from the attacker. So it would only cost you 10 feet of movement to get away from your opponent. After that you can just use your regular movement. The +10 to tumble at full speed is only useful if you're tumbling past a great number of opponents. Against just one, there's never a need to do it, unless the creature has reach.


----------



## theedj (Oct 9, 2011)

Kaisoku said:


> There's the Defensive Combat Training feat for those who aren't full BAB classes, and the Dodge feat grants a +1 Dodge bonus to AC, so also CMD. The mobility feat grants a +4 dodge bonus to AC when provoking an AoO for moving, so if you move out of threatened space and that giant wants to grapple or trip you, you have an additional +4 to you CMD against that.
> 
> The APG has Boneless Leather, a special magical armor that (among a laundry list of bonuses), grants +5 to your CMD.
> There's also the teamwork feat Coordinated Defense, which gives a +2 bonus to CMD if next to your ally who has this feat (cavaliers and inquisitors having greater advantage of this). Oh, and it's +4 if the enemy is larger.
> ...




Just out of curiosity, and to lend support for a mechanic that uses CMB instead of CMD when opposing an acrobatics/tumble check, does it strike anybody else as odd that the Dodge feat, Boneless Leather armor, a Ring of Protection, and Protection from ... spells all increase the difficulty for someone to tumble _away_?


----------



## Kaisoku (Oct 12, 2011)

That's something I argued back in Pathfinder Beta when they were changing the rules for tumbling.

I personally don't think it makes any logical sense whatsoever. Perhaps now, in the wake of recent rulings on combat maneuvers with weapons being changed/clarified, this is a topic that might get some traction over on the Paizo boards.


----------

