Other than a few skills like Use Magical Device, if you are NOT in combat can you still take 10?
Yep.
It all depends on whether or not the action has potential negative consequences that may occur if you fail, such as disabling a trap, or say a linguistics check to identify a dangerous magical glyph.
If there is a consequence for failing then you cannot, regardless of combat.
That is the "take 20" limitation, not the "take 10" one. Take 10 is always possible unless you are distracted or in combat. Or at least it better be, since I've been playing it that way forever.
Update:
Taking 10: When your character is not in immediate
danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10. Instead of
rolling 1d20 for the skill check, calculate your result as if
you had rolled a 10. For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes
them automatically successful. Distractions or threats (such
as combat) make it impossible for a character to take 10. In
most cases, taking 10 is purely a safety measure—you know
(or expect) that an average roll will succeed but fear that a
poor roll might fail, so you elect to settle for the average roll
(a 10). Taking 10 is especially useful in situations where a
particularly high roll wouldn’t help.
Taking 20: When you have plenty of time, you are
faced with no threats or distractions, and the skill being
attempted carries no penalties for failure, you can take 20.
In other words, if you a d20 roll enough times, eventually
you will get a 20. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill
"Distractions or Combat"...so what about swimming across a rushing river?
"Distractions or Combat"...so what about swimming across a rushing river?
By RAW you can't take 10 while swimming across a river if someone is shooting arrows at you. If you are talking about a river with rapids, I'd have to determine how risky it was.
Personally, I'd probably allow it.
"Distractions or Combat"...so what about swimming across a rushing river?
Swimming across a river, no matter how hard it is, is not a distraction from swimming across a river.
Swimming across a river, while trying to make sure your friend isn't getting washed away, is a distraction.
Re: taking 10 with swim, from PRD:
Water Swim DC
Calm water 10
Rough water 15
Stormy water 20*
* You can't take 10 on a Swim check in stormy water, even if you aren't otherwise being threatened or distracted.
So I imagine a particularly rough river would be considered "Stormy Water" but most rivers would be calm or rough, and so you could take 10. Of course you still can't if you are getting shot at or something.. If your character has a swim speed (from a spell or such) you can always take 10 on swim checks regardless of circumstances.
Re: taking 10 with swim, from PRD:
Water Swim DC
Calm water 10
Rough water 15
Stormy water 20*
* You can't take 10 on a Swim check in stormy water, even if you aren't otherwise being threatened or distracted.So I imagine a particularly rough river would be considered "Stormy Water" but most rivers would be calm or rough, and so you could take 10. Of course you still can't if you are getting shot at or something.. If your character has a swim speed (from a spell or such) you can always take 10 on swim checks regardless of circumstances.
Yeah, that's more or less what I meant by "I'd have to figure out the risk."
Yeah, I was agreeing with you, was just showing the relevant passage :)
Swimming across a river, no matter how hard it is, is not a distraction from swimming across a river.
Is climbing a wall a distraction from climbing a wall? My DM thinks it should be, since if you fall, you'll take damage and (therefore) you're in danger.
Is climbing a wall a distraction from climbing a wall? My DM thinks it should be, since if you fall, you'll take damage and (therefore) you're in danger.
Swimming across a river, no matter how hard it is, is not a distraction from swimming across a river.
No. If nothing is distracting you, you are not being distracted. Failing a roll won't cause you damage, it will cause you to fall. Falling a long distance and hitting the ground will cause you damage, but that is something else, it is not the skill. Just like how failing a swim check will make you go under the water, but it is the not being able to hold your breath long enough that is going to put you in danger, not the inability to swim.
You can't take the slightest possibility of something bad happening as being in "immediate danger/distracted"... like if you are Appraising an item, you can take 10 when not in combat etc even if "If I get this appraisal wrong my party will beat me up therefore I am in danger"
:P
Then again, if the party was all hovering around you and being very threatening it would be distracting...
To answer the question, though, No.
|
Is climbing a wall a distraction from climbing a wall? My DM thinks it should be, since if you fall, you'll take damage and (therefore) you're in danger.
Your GM needs to review the purpose of Take 10 is. Many seem to think it's a cheap way out rather than being there to avoid needing to make checks when a routine effort would get the job done.
Regarding climbing...the phrase isn't "danger," it is "immediate danger." You can take 10 if failing would cause you harm; that isn't a restriction on take 10. You cannot take 10 when in immediate danger. There was an example in the D&D 3.5 PHB specifically about climbing. Climb..take 10...no problem. Climb while being shot at by orcs with bows...no take 10 because you're in immediate danger from the bowfire.
Summary: the standard for prohibiting take 10 isn't "something bad might happen to me," rather it is "something bad is happening to me that is keeping me from giving a typical effort to an otherwise routine task."
I disagree. If you are climbing over a 100ft drop which could kill you, that is immediate danger.
"For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful."
Climbing over a life-threatening fall is not routine.
|
Update:Taking 10: When your character is not in immediate
danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10. Instead of
rolling 1d20 for the skill check, calculate your result as if
you had rolled a 10. For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes
them automatically successful. Distractions or threats (such
as combat) make it impossible for a character to take 10. In
most cases, taking 10 is purely a safety measure—you know
(or expect) that an average roll will succeed but fear that a
poor roll might fail, so you elect to settle for the average roll
(a 10). Taking 10 is especially useful in situations where a
particularly high roll wouldn’t help.
Taking 20: When you have plenty of time, you are
faced with no threats or distractions, and the skill being
attempted carries no penalties for failure, you can take 20.
In other words, if you a d20 roll enough times, eventually
you will get a 20. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill
Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood? Wiki:
"The Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery has a world-renowned collection of works by Burne-Jones and the Pre-Raphaelites that, some claim, strongly influenced the young J.R.R. Tolkien,[9] who would later go on to write his novels, such as The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, with their influence taken from the same mythological scenes portrayed by the Pre-Raphaelites."
So they not only inspired Tolkien, they also authored portions of the SRD/PRD circa 1848? PRB = Real OG's (Original Grognards)
The way I read and implement the rule in my game is as follows:
The question is less about being in danger and more about whether or not something is distracting you from the task you are trying to accomplish. Of course being in danger tends to be inherently distracting.
For example in stormy waters you are being tossed about while trying to swim. Even if you can breath underwater this is still going to be distracting so I agree that it’s reasonable to prohibit characters from taking 10 on a swim check regardless.
When climbing a wall with no other distractions I’d say taking 10 was valid regardless of height they climbing to. That said; if the character were afraid of heights, severely injured, or tiring from climbing I wouldn’t allow them to take 10 on the check. Also, I always inform a person if they won’t be able to take 10 so they can change their mind if desired.
This last bit is something of a house rule but I’ll bring it up anyway since it follows what I believe is the spirit of the rule for taking 10. In some circumstances I allow characters to take ten regardless of the distraction but not without penalty. For example:
By RAW you can't take 10 while swimming across a river if someone is shooting arrows at you.
I would actually allow a character to choose to ignore the arrow fire if they wanted to. Of course if they did they’d be considered flatfooted since they can’t try and dodge something that they are ignoring. Additionally, if they were hit I’d require a swim check regardless since they certainly couldn’t ignore that. Not surprisingly, this option is almost never used in my campaign. Still I allow for it.
My reasoning for this is straightforward. If you weren’t aware of the arrow fire and crossed without being hit it makes no sense that you would suddenly be required to make a check as nothing is interfering with your ability to swim and you can’t be distracted by something you are entirely unaware of.
@prawn: actually if you are a skilled rock climber I’d argue that it is it is routine. While this depends on the individual, we are talking about someone skilled enough at climbing to take 10 and make it all the way up. Of course whether or not that constitutes sufficient skill to represent that is subjective so you may or may not agree.
| 36 people marked this as a favorite. |
The purpose of Take 10 is to allow you to avoid the swinginess of the d20 roll in completing a task that should be easy for you. A practiced climber (5 ranks in Climb) should never, ever fall when climbing a practice rock-climbing wall at a gym (DC 15) as long as he doesn't rush and isn't distracted by combat, trying to juggle, and so on. Take 10 means he doesn't have to worry about the randomness of rolling 1, 2, 3, or 4.
The rule is there to prevent weirdness from the fact that you can roll 1 on tasks you shouldn't fail at under normal circumstances.
I'm not an athlete, but I can easily to a standing broad jump of 5-6 feet, over and over again without fail. It doesn't matter if I'm jumping over a piece of tape on the floor or a deep pit... I can make that jump. With a running start, it's even easier. If I were an adventurer, a 5-foot-diameter pit would be a trivial obstacle. Why waste game time making everyone roll to jump over the pit? Why not let them Take 10 and get on to something relevant to the adventure that's actually a threat, like a trap, monster, or shady NPC?
Let your players Take 10 unless they're in combat or they're distracted by something other than the task at hand. It's just there to make the game proceed faster so you don't have big damn heroes failing to accomplish inconsequential things.
I disagree. If you are climbing over a 100ft drop which could kill you, that is immediate danger.
"For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful."
Climbing over a life-threatening fall is not routine.
"Climbing over a life-threatening fall" means that the task has dangerous consequences which means that you can't take 20 and not that you can't take 10.
"Climbing over a life-threatening fall" means that the task has dangerous consequences which means that you can't take 20 and not that you can't take 10.I disagree. If you are climbing over a 100ft drop which could kill you, that is immediate danger.
"For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful."
Climbing over a life-threatening fall is not routine.
I agree totally...
Climb: Take 10 (being careful while climbing) if there's no one shooting at you. But you can't take 20 because there is a consequence if you fail a roll (falling).
Swim: Same thing... Take 10 (slowly dog paddle to the other side) if there's no crocodiles trying to bite you). But you can't take 20 because there is a consequence if you fail a roll (drowning). And if the waters are calm, basically all you'll need is a 10 to swim across.
Pick Lock: Take 10 (concentrating on the lock picking) if there's no one shooting at you. Take 20 (keep picking the lock until it opens) if you have all night to pick the lock (as failing would have no consequences, the lock would just still be locked.)
Decipher Script: Take 10 (slowly re-read the ancient symbols found on the wall) if there's no zombies reaching for your throat. Take 20 (go over the symbols, using the notes you have in your backpack) if you have 20 minutes of free time aead of you ("Ah! it seems to be a warning of some sort!").
You get it...
Ultradan
|
|
I do not think there are any guidelines for how long a Take 10 action takes compared to a normal one.
I'm torn between it taking a normal amount of time and twice as long. Anyone else have an opinion?
It takes the same amount of time as a rolled skill check. It is a single skill check rather than the repeat-until-success-it-will-take-20-times-as-long mechanism of take 20.
|
|
Though since the idea behind a 'take 10' check is that the character is being careful and not making stupid mistakes, a DM could easily rule that it takes slightly longer. Anywhere from the time of a rolled check to double that time sounds logical to me.
I also recommend that a DM not penalize PC's for trying to take 10 on something that's too difficult for them to accomplish that way, unless the task is deceptively hard.
Good Example: "You size up the cliff and begin to climb, but you only get five feet before you realize that it is beyond your skill to accomplish easily. You could continue, but you'd risk falling."
Bad Example: "Your take 10 result is a 19? You fall 30 feet." *rolls damage*
Good Example: "A 19, you say? Normally that would work on a wall like this. But the moment you put your weight on it, the wall crumbles somewhat beneath you and you slide all the way to the bottom!"
Most people know whether they can easily succeed on a task before they try, unless there's something about it they don't know (like undertow, crumbling surfaces, extra-slick areas, strong winds, etc). Taking 10, though this is not stated in the book to my knowledge, should carry with it more than just rudimentary evaluation of difficulty on the character's part.
Like Sean just said, the purpose of Taking 10 is to reduce unnecessary rolling. If the DM decides that rolling is necessary on a task, for whatever reason, then the DM should require a roll. Hopefully, the DM has a good reason, and not a silly one.
|
|
It takes the same amount of time as a rolled skill check.
Now that I consider it, the normal amount of time makes sense.
When you are climbing a wall and someone is shooting at you, you need to split your focus between climbing and worrying about getting hit. When no one else is there to bother you, you can focus on the task at hand.
I hate take10 and the low skill DCs. A normal 1st level charakter easily has +5 on class skills without specialization, feats etc. He already beats most of the common DCs with take10 and he can "always" take10 (my personal feeling).
Climbing the Mount Everest is no problem.
Riding a wild mustang into combat is no problem.
Swiming across the Atlantic Ocean (without stormy wheater) is no problem.
Detecting traps and secret doors is no problem.
Take10 makes the most DCs useless in my opinion. At last , remeber we are talking about a 1rst level charakter without skill specialization and in many situations they can use take20 too.
I use the RAW but i dont like them. :p
What kind of traps and secret doors have a DC of 15, that a 1st-level PC could Take 10 and succeed with a 15?
{He already beats most of the common DCs with take10}
That's the point. A DC 10 is something an average person with a +0 succeeds at more than half the time (an average roll on a d20 is a 10.5). Your typical starting adventurer should be able to do as well or better than an average person.
Climbing Mount Everest would be a much higher DC than 10 or 15 and would require a series of checks in my opinion.
i really disagree on that. beeing a rough mountain, the biggest part would indeed be 5. some parts would be 10. and only the most difficult ones would be 15.
but keep in mind. noone died at the mount everest at the normal parts.the died at night, when they failed their dc 25 fortitude save against the cold. they died when taking 10 wasnt enough anymore as exhaustion kicked in by cold and thin air. (-6str and dex really makes a difference between +11 and +8when taking 10 at that dc 20 wall)
yes. taking 10 is enough to swim accross the oceam even with +0 in swimming. but you cant rest. and 1d6 lethal damage every hour can knock you out and drown you before you swam across the ocean.
with this in mind, feats like endurance actually make sense
with this in mind, feats like endurance actually make senseEndurance would make sense if it halved the frequency (i.e. doubled the durations of activity) of the checks.
It's been the red-headed step child of feats for far too long,
James
This is so true, it makes me sad :(
Yay swimming across the Atlantic:
"Each hour that you swim, you must make a DC 20 Swim check or take 1d6 points of nonlethal damage from fatigue."
Yay climbing mount everest:
"DC25: A rough surface, such as a natural rock wall or a brick wall."
"+5: Surface is slippery."
I think you would find at least a few of those.
And as was mentioned charging into combat would be obviously in combat.
Etc etc.
Take 10 is an excellent rule.
Endurance should be a skill. That would make it worth the price.
Based on the books and documentaries I've seen of Mt. Everest, the most difficult part of the climb is the last "step" which has to be traversed on an aluminum LADDER that the sherpas place there every year for the climbing season. There are also a series of crevasses that are spanned also by aluminum ladders which the sherpas place there.
If the climb were made at sea level under sunny skies it would be a walk in the park. There is no "rock wall climb" that is made by any climber at any time. Climbers pretty much walk the whole way, with just a few areas where they have to haul their equipment laden butts up ladders to AVOID having to make rock climbs.
In that sense it is a tourist hike.
However.
And it is one of the biggest "howevers" in the history of howevering...
The climb is not made at seal level, the most critical, dangerous parts of the climb are made above 27,000 feet, which is just about the height that commercial jet airplanes fly.
If I were GMing a climb up Mt Everest there would be so many DC modifiers that it would blow your mind, but it would STILL be an easy climb for an adventurer with ranks in a class skill of climb. That's because the climb is actually made by dozens or hundreds of people every year, and pretty much the only time they die is when their equipment breaks down, bad weather moves in, or they push themselves to get to the top and don't have time to climb back down before the deadly night temperatures and running out of oxygen kill them.
Besides, in many cases the sherpas haul some of the tourists up the mountain.
Mt Everest is a bad example for skill checks. It is a great example for endurance checks, environmental modifiers and sudden storms which change everything in an instant.
@ Lyrax: Yeah, true enough.
Take 10 is only an awesome rule when your group understands:
1) The take 10 rule itself.
2) When to use it.
3) When not to use it.
and
4) What it is supposed to do.Sadly, this does not describe all the Pathfinder groups I've been in.
QFT
|
I disagree. If you are climbing over a 100ft drop which could kill you, that is immediate danger.
"For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful."
Climbing over a life-threatening fall is not routine.
How do you know?
You've given absolutely no description of the thing to be climbed.They could be climbing a well-fixed ladder, wearing a safety harness.
Then it doesn't matter if they're 10 feet up, or 1000 feet.
I'm sure you've seen those black and white photos of early 20th century New York steeplejacks having their packed lunches on a girder? How many of them fell off and died during the raising of each building? Not as many as you'd get, if you forced infinite rolls for each day's work.
When deciding if a climb is easy, ask the following;
What's the DC?
Are there any prevailing conditions that modify that DC?
What's the skill level of the climber?
Is that skill bonus within 10 of the adjusted DC?
Then it's routine.
The DC of the climb, and the consequences of failure, are two totally separate issues.
Most people fall when something unexpected breaks their concentration, or the circumstances change to a greater difficulty that they didn't count on when they started their climb.
That's why I'd warn a player who looked to be pushing the limit of the take 10 rule, "You think this climb is within your ability, given ideal conditions." Then, I'm covered if and when I ask for a roll later, when he's shot at, startles a nesting bird, when the weather changes, etc.
I have one question when it comes to the 'take 10 rule'. What about sleight of hand? Does the rule fit this skill too? And if it does, then under what conditions those it fit it?
I can only imagine it fitting when trying to steal from a very low safety grocery store, and that it wontfit when trying to steal from the king while hes heavily protected...
And what about the 'take 20' rule?
|
|
If you take 20, then you suffer the consequences of rolling a '1', whatever they may be. If there are none, then you can do it just fine.
You can't take 10 if it's an opposed roll, or if the roll is dramatically important. If a level 5 rogue goes into the marketplace to steal a few GP worth out of peoples' pockets, that's probably routine and not worth rolling.
But under the watchful eye of the palace guard? You bet there will be an opposed roll there!
You can't take 10 if it's an opposed roll, or if the roll is dramatically important.
This is not RAW. Nothing in the rules prevents you from taking ten on an opposed roll, or when it's "dramatically important." The only time you cannot take 10 is when you are dealing with "Distractions or threats (such as combat)," or when another rule specifically says you can't (like Use Magic Device).
You can't take 10 if it's an opposed roll, or if the roll is dramatically important.This is not RAW. Nothing in the rules prevents you from taking ten on an opposed roll, or when it's "dramatically important." The only time you cannot take 10 is when you are dealing with "Distractions or threats (such as combat)," or when another rule specifically says you can't (like Use Magic Device).
Lets say a 20th level rogue (with a sleight of hand on +26) walks up to a king, and tries to pick pocket him, then he cant fail?
Taking ten on an opposed roll is fine.
A thief with a +5 sleight of hand skill takes ten.
The target number for the perception check is fifteen, plus modifiers for distance, etc.
Lets say a 20th level rogue (with a sleight of hand on +26) walks up to a king, and tries to pick pocket him, then he cant fail?
DC 36 perception check.
DC 36 perception check.
Lets say a 20th level rogue (with a sleight of hand on +26) walks up to a king, and tries to pick pocket him, then he cant fail?
...plus the perception checks of the King's elite guards and anyone else that has a chance to perceive the attempt, plus having to deal with all the various other protections a King is likely to have. And who's to say what you're stealing is the genuine article? If the King is in a postition to come into contact with the general populace, you can be sure he's wearing good-looking imitations of the crown jewels, not the real thing.
Oh, and don't forget it's only a DC20 to succeed on a Pickpocket attempt. The opposed check is just to see if you did it unnoticed. So technically you only need a +10 in the skill to automatically succeed in grabbing something in a normal situation. A +19 will cover ANY situation. There's still a matter of being noticed of course.
DC 36 perception check.
Lets say a 20th level rogue (with a sleight of hand on +26) walks up to a king, and tries to pick pocket him, then he cant fail?
Ok... How much more difficult does it get when it comes to range? (you know seeing the pick pocketter?
Ok... How much more difficult does it get when it comes to range? (you know seeing the pick pocketter?DC 36 perception check.
Lets say a 20th level rogue (with a sleight of hand on +26) walks up to a king, and tries to pick pocket him, then he cant fail?
Same as any other Perception check. +1 per 10'.
...plus the perception checks of the King's elite guards and anyone else that has a chance to perceive the attempt, plus having to deal with all the various other protections a King is likely to have. And who's to say what you're stealing is the genuine article? If the King is in a postition to come into contact with the general populace, you can be sure he's wearing good-looking imitations of the crown jewels, not the real thing.DC 36 perception check.
Lets say a 20th level rogue (with a sleight of hand on +26) walks up to a king, and tries to pick pocket him, then he cant fail?
Yeah, really rich people go out in public with fake stuff all the time.
No, he'd be wearing real jewels worth lots of real money. It's the people who can't afford real things and want to look rich who wear fake things that are good imitations of real things.