You can Take 20 when there is no negative risk in failing and you have time.
You can Take 10 when there is no real impact of having a low or high roll and you have time.
The only skill you can't is UMD
No issue with Take 20 on Perception, not spotting a trap doesn't hurt you, walking into it does. If that makes sense.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unless otherwise specified (e.g. Use Magic Device), you can take 10 with any skill (provided you're not in immediate danger or distracted).
Having said that, I would have the utmost respect for DM B's ruling. The other DMs, not so much -- especially DM E. Did you make up that example, or did it really happen?
You can Take 10 when there is no real impact of having a low or high roll and you have time.
That's not what the rules say:
"When your character is not in immediate danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10."Nothing about high or low rolls or having enough time.
Hogarth - the biggist reason I T10 on perception checks is in searching rooms. [etc.]
You're preaching to the choir. I have one level 3 character with a +16 Perception modifier, and a level 7 character with a +23 Perception modifier and I try to use "take 10" as often as I can. I hate surprises. :-)
|
This is one of the biggest points of contention I've seen in my home game. If the DM makes you roll every 5' square to make sure that there are no traps in every square, it becomes tedious for you, the DM, and extremely boring for every other player.
I've had my DM make me start making the rolls and all the other players just say, "screw it," and have their characters run down the hall triggering anything in it. So makes all that investment in Perception and Disable Device nearly useless. We came to an agreement that I would roll a die at the beginning of the night (and after everytime something was discovered) and that would be the perception check.
As for taking 10 or 20... Searching for a trap can be dangerous. The act of searching itself can't set it off, but if you don't find it, you can then trigger it. So I would not allow a 20 on searching a hall for traps. But as long as there aren't distracting or dangerous circumstances like Combat, balancing on a high wire, extreme weather conditions, et. al. I would allow a 10.
]
That's not what the rules say:
"When your character is not in immediate danger or distracted, you may choose to take 10."Nothing about high or low rolls or having enough time.
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.
Seems it does...and "having enough time" to me means not in danger or distracted. YMMV
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
As for taking 10 or 20... Searching for a trap can be dangerous. The act of searching itself can't set it off, but if you don't find it, you can then trigger it. So I would not allow a 20 on searching a hall for traps. But as long as there aren't distracting or dangerous circumstances like Combat, balancing on a high wire, extreme weather conditions, et. al. I would allow a 10.
This is what the rules prescribe, actually. Taking 20 means you try over and over again until you get it, and you are assumed to fail several times along the way. A GM could even be nasty and say "Sure, take 20. Now, on that first failure of yours, make a reflex save."
Also, since a lot of this discussion is on trap spotting:
Common “take 20” skills include Disable Device (when used to open locks), Escape Artist, and Perception (when attempting to find traps).
|
|
Andrew - did I play for you in my last game at GenCon? In my most resent game I came to the last door and the DM said "Your take 10 shows nothing and you can't take 20." I look around and see all the dead monsters and healed up characters and shrug my shoulders. "Ok... I roll a perception check" - "go ahead" - "a 16... so I do it again, a 4, roll again..."
Player "B" "what are you doing"
Me "DM said I can't take 20, so I'm doing 20 perception rolls. Third roll is a 9"
Player "C" "Why can't you take 20 if there's no danger?"
me "forth roll is a 10"
Player "B" "You can't take 20 on a Perception check!"
me "5th roll is a 7"
Player "D" "What's the problem?"
me "6th roll is a 1"
Player "B" "If you fail you trigger any traps!"
me "7th roll is a 20"
Player "C" "Well open the door"
me "8th roll is a 5"
Player "D" "Somebody need healing?"
me "9th roll is a ...."you get the idea.
It's even more "fun" if the DM is making my rolls. :(
No. That is not how I would have handled the situation at all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Couple things by RAW -
There's no 3.5 'search' vs. spot vs. listen anymore - It's all perception. Unless the trap is written that it's not subject to visual inspection, the perception DC is just that, a perception DC. You can stand at the doorway, spend 2 minutes to take 20, and you should perceive clues to any trap in the room with a DC equal or less than 20+ your perception. Up to the DM if they want to apply the unfavorable condition mod and +1/10 distance mods to visual scans (the distance mods really only make sense for non-visual preception), but anything else is a house rule or modifying the encounter.
Actively perceiving something is a move action, taking 20 shorthand for doing it 20 times (generally simplified to 2 minutes for actions that take less than a round) - you should be able to just do the math and figure out how fast you're moving if you want to take 10 or 20 on perception as you creep carefully along. The whole point of the take 10/20 rules is to get rid of unnecessarry dice rolling.
IMO RAI is the trick with traps is more about the disarming than the detecting.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Sorry Andrew, I must be suffering from post GenCon tiredness... lack of sleep.
Ok, here's the setting.
a large metal closed door. My character is in the 5' square in front of it (in a 5' wide, 10 foot long hallway). The room behind me has been searched and all monsters slain/captured, all faction missions (except mine) finished, all characters healed and ready to take on the new room.
The DM says "Your take 10 perception check on the door reveals nothing."
I say, "I'll take 20 on a perception check on the door".what would you, as the judge tell me? (so that there is no spoiler here, let's say there is no trap I could detect with the result I would get with a 20).
Well, I'm not Andrew, but if you're interested in an assortment of opinions, here's what I'd say:
You trigger the explosive runes by reading them. ;) If no explosive runes (or similar don't-have-to-touch-it hazards), then instead go to the following:
1d4 minutes pass (if time is an issue in the scenario) as you visually comb over the door over and over again. I give you whatever information about the door is appropriate for 20 plus your perception bonus.
In-game, it's the same as if you just rolled it over and over again until you roll a 20, except that out-of-game, we can get on with things. And that's what Take 20 is in the rules.
To me, Perception is using all the senses other than touch, even with the PRPG update to the rules, unless you are specifically saying so. It might just be my semantics on it, but if someone says they are using Perception to look, then they are using their eyes, and if they say they are using Perception to search, then they are using their hands as well. It is up to the GM to ask the player how they are using Perception and not just let them make a vague statement and then roll the dice. I can accept using Take 10 or 20 for trap finding, but as soon as you include touch in whatever you are doing, then Take 20 cannot be used as there is now a penalty for failure, though I personally do not like Take 20 for trap finding unless you know you are in a heavily-trapped location. Maybe I am just still used to the old, old (pre 3rd ed.) rules where once you fail, you cannot try again because your character does not believe there is anything there to find.
Another example, if you are a guard on a 20-foot high wall, you are not using touch to determine if the enemy is sneaking up on your position when you make your Perception check. Same if you are the enemy outside the wall using Perception to see the guard and what direction he is looking as you try to move closer. Both could Take 10 in this situation but not Take 20, since there is a definite risk for failure. Now, the enemy makes it safely to the base of the wall and can do a Perception check of the wall for secure handholds or can just start climbing. The Perception check could be a Take 10 or Take 20, since touch would not be involved beyond the first handhold and failure would not reveal him. For the climb roll, however, you could only Take 10 and not 20 because there is a penalty for failure.
And yes, it would be nice to have a complete list of all skills where you can Take 10 or 20, seeing as how there is a Bard ability, Jack-of-all-trades, that at 19th level lets the bard Take 10 on any skill, even those that do not normally allow Take 10 to be used.
nosig,
For your example, it would depend on whether your Take 10 attempt succeeded or failed and by how much. Either way, I would tell you that you believe there is no trap on the door and that it is safe to open, with some variation on what I say depending on the amount by which you succeeded or failed. But unless I gave you a hint that all was not quite right, there would be no reason for you to check again because your character believes it is safe, no matter what you, the player, feels. Now, another player could have their character check too, but you just might be playing a character who is so confident in his abilities that you should role-play it by telling the others it is safe and open the door before anyone else can try and check also. You have to remember you are in character and keep the meta-gaming out of the situation.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Jiggy - so can Ex Runes be detected with a Perception check? "Character B" has a high perception, but can't read. Can he detect the Ex. Runes without setting them off?
The explosive runes bit was a joke:
"Alright, I'm gonna look this door over REEEAAAALL thoroughly... Hey, there's some writing on AAAARRRRGGGGHHH!!!!"
My point was that if a character takes 20 because they believe that there's no penalty for failure (which is part of the conditions for being able to do so), and they just happen to be wrong, you have to apply the penalty of a failure because "Take 20" assumes that they DO fail. Repeatedly.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Jiggy:
again I ask - so can Ex Runes be detected with a Perception check?
"Character B" has a high perception, but can't read. Can he detect the Ex. Runes without setting them off?
"Character C" has a high perception, and can read, does he set off Ex. Runes just checking for them?
*sigh*
That's a question to be answered by reading the description of ExplRunes, which I'll leave to you. My post wasn't really about that spell in particular (I don't even really know the spell very well - I just picked it because of its fame/slight history with Order of the Stick). I was just including the caveat that (as I read it) a character can begin to take 20 if they believe there are no penalties for failure, but if they're wrong, then their "take 20" incurs the penalties of failure.|
|
Sorry Andrew, I must be suffering from post GenCon tiredness... lack of sleep.
Ok, here's the setting.
a large metal closed door. My character is in the 5' square in front of it (in a 5' wide, 10 foot long hallway). The room behind me has been searched and all monsters slain/captured, all faction missions (except mine) finished, all characters healed and ready to take on the new room.
The DM says "Your take 10 perception check on the door reveals nothing."
I say, "I'll take 20 on a perception check on the door".what would you, as the judge tell me? (so that there is no spoiler here, let's say there is no trap I could detect with the result I would get with a 20).
No problem. I understand the Gen Con lag. I have it myself right now.
I would probably rule that you could take 20 to search for a trap. However, if the trap could be triggered by proximity or touch, and taking 20 includes the time to fail several times, then you’d actually fail regardless what the perception DC was, and trigger the trap. You except that when taking 20, one of your rolls would be a 1. Either that, or if I knew you could fail by touch or proximity, I would not allow you to take 20 on that particular perception check.
As long as you are not in combat or some other distracting or dangerous situation (unless you had a feat or other ability that allowed it) you could take 10 on said checks.
|
|
My interpretation for the original question would be:
Taking 10 while moving is fine. If you're not in combat and not using a skill that explicitly forbids it (UMD) you can take 10 anytime you like. I allow my stealthy PCs to take 10 on their stealth checks and allow 10s on knowledge checks outside of combat. For NPCs, I always have them take 10 on stealth and perception so it's all up to the player's die to determine success or failure. One of the big reasons for this is if you have a large enough group of NPCs doing perception checks, it's almost like the baddies get to take 20 on their perception (because one of the many rolls will be high), which isn't fair as it totally neuters stealth attempts for all practical purposes.
Taking 20 for perception while moving is also fine. The only thing I would add is that the "20" from taking 20 happens at the end of the search, not at the beginning and the "1" happens in the middle so if there are any negative consequences to failure, they are incurred first. I always run dynamic dungeons (with baddies moving around and listening for noises and all that jazz) so if my team were to take 20 like this (i.e. spend 1-2 minutes per 5' square of wall and floor), they would be eventually be bumped into by moving monsters eventually while they were searching.
Practically, the taking 20 question probably won't happen after early levels because there will be spellcasters with minutes/level buffs running that don't want their durations running out. What we did in our last D&D 3.5 campaign is that as the trap sniffer, I had a standing order to "check" every square we stepped into and check every door before we opened it but instead of rolling every time, the DM just asked for a roll anytime there actually was something. If I succeeded, I found it, if I failed, the trap was sprung so the roll itself wasn't a spoiler.
In my current campaign, the rogue took the Trap Spotter talent so it's a moot point as he's always checking.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Failing a Perception check against traps never sets the trap off (unless, perhaps, it is a magical rune or script that must be read) as Perception does not state that you are "using your hands" or otherwise putting yourself in harm's way.
It's failing your Disable Device check that risks setting off the trap.
|
|
Up to the DM if they want to apply the unfavorable condition mod and +1/10 distance mods to visual scans (the distance mods really only make sense for non-visual preception), but anything else is a house rule or modifying the encounter.
I find this opinion really strange.
Your eyes come with a built in zoom feature?I find that seeing the details of something at 3 meters is really different from seeing the details of something at 30 or 300 meters.
Then there is the not small problem of seeing something that is on the other side of an obstacle.
"If you it the switch on the back of the statue the trap on the door is disabled. The DC to find it is 20."
Your skill can be as high as you wish but if you are looking the statue from from the door that is 20' away and in front of it you will not find the switch.
This is one of the biggest points of contention I've seen in my home game. If the DM makes you roll every 5' square to make sure that there are no traps in every square, it becomes tedious for you, the DM, and extremely boring for every other player.
For my money, this is the main point of Taking 10 - you trade in the hassle of having to roll constantly for routine precautions (good for game pacing and flow) in order to get a predictable, neither particularly bad nor good, performance. I definitely allow my players to Take 10 searching for traps up and down corridors if they choose to do so. I see it as taking certain standard but non-exhaustive steps in spotting traps and other problems.
I would also allow the PC to take 20 as long as they had the time and weren't distracted.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
It's a very misunderstood topic. I recall some advice at the beginning of World's Largest Dungeon where the designers suggested that if your PCs took 10 or 20 that you add 10 or 20 to the DC - so we're taking 0 now? (effectively)
AFAIK the proper way of doing the action you describe (take 10 every 5 foot space) is to say the group only moves 5 feet per round, as it takes a move action to do each check (You can either make 2 checks with a 5 foot step, or one check and move further, but leave spaces unchecked). Pretty much the only cost of doing this is spell durations ticking away/other time consequences.
I always rule that taking 20 means you roll 1 nineteen times and then the 20. If that sequence of rolls has no consequences then go for it.
A lot of GMs dislike the take 10/take 20 rules becasue they remove randomness from the game. These GMs seem to try and find every way they can to remove the option to take 10 or 20.
|
|
Jiggy - so can Ex Runes be detected with a Perception check? "Character B" has a high perception, but can't read. Can he detect the Ex. Runes without setting them off?The explosive runes bit was a joke:
"Alright, I'm gonna look this door over REEEAAAALL thoroughly... Hey, there's some writing on AAAARRRRGGGGHHH!!!!"
My point was that if a character takes 20 because they believe that there's no penalty for failure (which is part of the conditions for being able to do so), and they just happen to be wrong, you have to apply the penalty of a failure because "Take 20" assumes that they DO fail. Repeatedly.
If you take 20 in a perception check you are sure to trigger a set of explosive runes.
If you have the trapfinding ability and get a result high enough you can detect them without triggering the trap. You could have smelled the faint ozone twang given out by the charged magic or know how to look the item sideways so that you see only a piece of the writing samml enough that it will not trigger them.
Note: to be precise you need the trapfinding to disable the trap, not to find it. Everyone with enough perception can find it.
nosig, about your "Then I roll 20 times" thing. A questionable ruling is not a good reason to be disruptive at the table, especially during Society play.
“DM A” states that you have to roll perception checks “because there is a danger from traps and you are distracted by that danger/threatened”.
“DB B” says that you can’t Take 10 on perception checks at his table. Period.
“DB C” says that it takes 10 times as long to Take 10 on a task. So one minute for each 5’ square.
“DB D” says you have to announce each perception attempt… 50 foot hall requires you to move your figure one square and say “I’m taking 10 on a perception check on the square ahead of me to detect traps” and repeat this 10 times. Oh, and you missed the gold ring laying on the floor in the square because you didn’t say “I’m taking 10 searching the square for loot” which is a different perception roll.
“DB E” says ok. And then drops your character into a pit you would have found, because “you can’t find traps – you’re character isn’t a rogue”.
And the list goes on.
Taking 20 is much the same way.
DM A is misunderstanding the distraction/danger rules so I don't agree with his ruling.
DM B is creating problems for himself and the pacing of his game by not allowing it.
DM C is applying a rule that doesn't exist - the extra time only applies to taking 20.
DM D has the same basic problem as DM B - he's hosing his own pacing by requiring the players to be overspecific. A player should be able to just layout his general plans and the DM can go from there.
DM E is clearly misunderstanding trap finding rules.
Asphesteros - what about this? taking 20 with Guidance - taking 4 minutes with the character casting Guidance on himself 20 times? would you allow this?
Sure, no rule prohibiting that I don't think. Whole point of guidance is letting you get a +1 in exchange for having the caster in the party with the 0 level slot devoted to it. It only last for a little while, so it's application to some skills that take a long time (like craft skills) is debatable, but stuff like perception checks is what it's made for.
The whole out of combat dynamic shouldn't be about rolling dice all the time with a 50% chance of a botch each time mooting the skills you built your character too be good at, so half the time you can't be really sure of anything regardless what skills or tricks you use. Basically if a trap is a <DC20 to find, finding it or not is really just a test whether they PC are looking for it - moving with caution or haste, being careful or careless. If it's supposed to be dicey even despite reasonable efforts, the DC should be more like 21 and up - something where you'll need stats, ranks, guidance, assists, etc. to succeed even taking 20.
Up to the DM if they want to apply the unfavorable condition mod and +1/10 distance mods to visual scans (the distance mods really only make sense for non-visual preception), but anything else is a house rule or modifying the encounter.
I find this opinion really strange.
Your eyes come with a built in zoom feature?
I find that seeing the details of something at 3 meters is really different from seeing the details of something at 30 or 300 meters.
You're not really thinking it through. +1/10 feet means an clearly visible object or person (DC0) is practically impossible to see 400 feet away (DC0+40). Only the severly nearsighted are that blind. (note it doesn't have to be DC0 to see at any range either, there's still the favorable/unfavorable +2/+5 mods & distraction, which modles someone approaching from a distance where you're not already aware of them & are looking at what's right in front of you not way down the road)
|
|
You're not really thinking it through. +1/10 feet means an clearly visible object or person (DC0) is practically impossible to see 400 feet away (DC0+40). Only the severly nearsighted are that blind. (note it doesn't have to be DC0 to see at any range either, there's still the favorable/unfavorable +2/+5 mods & distraction, which modles someone approaching from a distance where you're not already aware of them & are looking at what's right in front of you not way down the road)
The DC0 doesn't apply to someone walking down the road because they would be In Plain Sight and thus cannot use stealth and are therefore spotted automatically.
A DC0 stealth would be someone not attempting to hide but walking behind cover or concealment (e.g. looking through some trees or through a moderate, not total fog) and it's reasonable to think that it would be tough to spot such a person at 400'.
Look at the perception chart again - the DC0 for a visible creature is not dependant on ability to stealth, same as sound of battle is DC-10 on the same chart, smell of smoke is DC0 on the same chart, determine if food is spoiled on the same chart.
The DC0 for a visible creature is the DC to see something in your field of vision. It's practially impossible to fail without some other modifier boosting the DC, but just like real life, if the conditions suck (say it''s foggy or it's dark, or if they are really really far away) or if you are distracted, you might not notice someone in plain sight walking down the road right up to you, even if they're not trying to sneak up on you. Happens all the time. That DC modles that, and stealth layers on top of that.
|
|
PRD under Vision and Light: A creature can't use Stealth in an area of bright light unless it is invisible or has cover.
This is unequivocal and means that you are spotted if you are without cover or concealment and perception is automatic.
Thus, my interpretation of that DC0 example is that is not subject to distance modifiers. DC0 is the DC to see someone who is in the open, regardless of distance otherwise you get the silliness of not being able to see someone across a football field.
I'd probably houserule some limit to that where the spot would be automatic depending on target size so you could spot the moon automatically (a super-colossal object) at amazing distances while a fine critter in the open (a mouse) would be tough to see at 50 yards a tiny one (squirrel) at 100 yards, a small one (fox) tough to see at 200 yards, a man-sized (deer) at say 400 yards, an elephant at 800 yards and so on.
The sound of battle is a different case because logically it should be impossible to miss hearing it at short distances and reasonable to miss at long distances.
|
|
Diago: If the Perception is good enough to detect the Ex. Runes with a T10 check (or with a roll of 1 for that matter) are they triggered by the Perception skill?
Explosive Runes
Magic traps such as explosive runes are hard to detect and disable. A character with the trapfinding class feature (only) can use Disable Device to thwart explosive runes. The DC to find magic traps using Perception and to disable them is 25 + spell level, or 28 for explosive runes.
By RAW they can be disabled, so it should be possible to detect them without activating them. It is simply hard as you need to detect them from some not visual clue before reading them.
As most things in the game the rules gloss over on how you detect them.
And as to being disruptive, I was actually doing it the way the judge seemed to want me to - I admit I had lost patience with the judge and was being a pain to the other players (I shouldn't have rolled again after the first 20 result), it happens sometimes at the end of a Con when I am tired. But I had already fallen in one pit at a door and wanted the T20. Also I wanted to teach the Judge - as showing him the rules did not seem to help. ("Yes you can T10, and no you can't T20" doesn't seem right to me.) Your advice would be what? just open the door and risk it being trapped?
On my book that is being disruptive, especially during a convention game.
You hadn't the informations the judge had. For all you did know the door could have had a trap that was triggered by falling a perception roll by a wide enough margin (improbable but possible).If your opinion was that the GM ruling was heavily damaging in your regards you could have reported that after the end of the adventure.
Choosing to disrupt the game to "teach the Judge" a lesson is childish.
|
|
Asphesteros - what about this? taking 20 with Guidance - taking 4 minutes with the character casting Guidance on himself 20 times? would you allow this?Sure, no rule prohibiting that I don't think. Whole point of guidance is letting you get a +1 in exchange for having the caster in the party with the 0 level slot devoted to it. It only last for a little while, so it's application to some skills that take a long time (like craft skills) is debatable, but stuff like perception checks is what it's made for.
Guidance
This spell imbues the subject with a touch of divine guidance. The creature gets a +1 competence bonus on a single attack roll, saving throw, or skill check. It must choose to use the bonus before making the roll to which it applies.You need to have the other guy cast Guidance 20 times. Not difficult at it is a cantrip, but still you have to take in account that you have someone casting 20 spells "in a strong voice". Not the optimal situation if you are trying to be stealthy.
You're not really thinking it through. +1/10 feet means an clearly visible object or person (DC0) is practically impossible to see 400 feet away (DC0+40). Only the severly nearsighted are that blind. (note it doesn't have to be DC0 to see at any range either, there's still the favorable/unfavorable +2/+5 mods & distraction, which modles someone approaching from a distance where you're not already aware of them & are looking at what's right in front of you not way down the road)
Please! You are trying to find a trap, something that has probably been hidden.
So you are saying that it is as easy to see one at 1 feet, 10 foot or one hundred foot?| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have run into several different interpretations of the “Taking 10” and “Taking 20” rule, and to put it mildly, it’s getting to be a hot button for me. Is there anywhere where there is a list of the skills that your can Take 10 with? And the same for Take 20?
You can take 10 on any skill which doesn't say you can't (such as UMD).
You can take 20 on any skill which you can retry; taking 20 is effectively retrying.“Player X” with a character in the lead of the party says, “As we move, I would like to take 10 on a perception check for each 5’ section before moving into it.”
“DM A” states that you have to roll perception checks “because there is a danger from traps and you are distracted by that danger/threatened”.
“DB B” says that you can’t Take 10 on perception checks at his table. Period.
“DB C” says that it takes 10 times as long to Take 10 on a task. So one minute for each 5’ square.
“DB D” says you have to announce each perception attempt… 50 foot hall requires you to move your figure one square and say “I’m taking 10 on a perception check on the square ahead of me to detect traps” and repeat this 10 times. Oh, and you missed the gold ring laying on the floor in the square because you didn’t say “I’m taking 10 searching the square for loot” which is a different perception roll.
“DB E” says ok. And then drops your character into a pit you would have found, because “you can’t find traps – you’re character isn’t a rogue”.
And the list goes on.
Taking 20 is much the same way.
X: Technically fine, but only moving 5' per round. This means they only cover 50' per minute. This kind of unrealistic and inhuman persistence annoys me, because it's not how adventurers, or living beings of any sort, can behave for long. As DM I'd describe each square until the group at my table gets cheesed and surges forward, or leaves the guy behind. It illustrates how such persistence wears down one's patience... "congrats we just LARPed."
A: I hate to drag 3.x in here, but the SRD uses climbing a sheer cliff face as an example... y'know, those things if you fall, you could die from? This DM is fail.B: Houserule. Whatevs.
C: Reading comprehension fail. He's taking the text of taking 20 and applying it backwards to taking 10. Taking 10 is such things as driving your car. If the game had cars, would he make you roll every X feet to not crash? So in his world everyone gets in a car crash every 2 minutes (natural 1) on average? No, taking 10 means relaxing and doing what you know how to do... end of story. If explosions and blades and angry monsters were all flying all over the place at the time, you're likely to get distracted and maybe crash, so roll.
D: Nitpicking fail. This DM is stupid for inviting monstrous slowdowns in his own game. A good troll response? Get a recording of "I take 10 on 587347 perception checks, divided among each square, each object, and each creature. Please describe what I find." and play it at every out-of-combat action. When the DM gets annoyed call him out as a moron who wants to drag his game to a halt with petty garbage and time-wasting belligerence and nitpicking. If you slap him after saying it, put it on YouTube.
E: Ignore text fail. Read the rogue. Everyone can find traps now. Trapfinding is only needed to find magical traps in PF.
If the party wants to be alert, just let them say "I move slowly and cautiously, looking out for traps or ambushes". This is how people do things. The DM can consider this as something similar to what Player X is saying, except they're not moving 50' per minute (which is painfully annoying; try doing it IRL for 10 minutes and you'll begin to consider suicide as an alternative).
I personally consider this "taking 10 as I move", which means half-movement, and is very, very reasonable.
Looking for traps is much the same gig. People are posting that perception uses touch, or doesn't, uses literacy or not... forget it. Don't micromanage your characters into paralysis! Perception uses whatever senses are needed at the time, be it touch, reading, whatever. If it's explosive runes, and the Rogue makes a good enough perception check, they read up to "I memorized expl-" and then cry "ohoho! look what I found. Almost got me, mister mage." If it's a touch-activated trigger, and they make the check, their hand hovers a hair's breadth over the trigger and the rogue's instincts kick in - trap found.
Adversarial, nitpicky DMs need to be re-educated.
X: Technically fine, but only moving 5' per round. This means they only cover 50' per minute. This kind of unrealistic and inhuman persistence annoys me, because it's not how adventurers, or living beings of any sort, can behave for long.
Military trained snipers and skilled hunters do this sort of thing all the time. It's far from unrealistic.
As DM I'd describe each square until the group at my table gets cheesed and surges forward, or leaves the guy behind. It illustrates how such persistence wears down one's patience... "congrats we just LARPed."
Again, any trained professional that deals with explosives/booby traps is going to exercise this type of caution. The entire point of the T20 rules is that being cautions doesn't take additional time at the table. I don't believe that players should be penalized for exercising real caution. I know that if I were going to poke around in potentially booby trapped tombs, I'd take all the time I had, or thought I had, to avoid ending up with 2 broken legs at the bottom of a 30' pit. They may just be me, tho.
Military trained snipers and skilled hunters do this sort of thing all the time. It's far from unrealistic.
Any trained professional that deals with explosives/booby traps is going to exercise this type of caution. The entire point of the T20 rules is that being cautions doesn't take additional time at the table. I don't believe that players should be penalized for exercising real caution. I know that if I were going to poke around in potentially booby trapped tombs, I'd take all the time I had, or thought I had, to avoid ending up with 2 broken legs at the bottom of a 30' pit. They may just be me, tho.
Fair enough. However, the level of caution at the gaming table need only be enough to satisfy the requirements to find traps. Now, if the group were IRL military trained, found that the landmine countermeasures training during BCT was interesting, and decided to import it into a gritty simulationist game, great. However, to declare "I take 10, every 5', for the next twelve city blocks... " well there's a point where you have to holler an "all clear". Plus, remember: This aint no solo mission. Not everyone will be as patient as you. 10 min/level buffs are counting down and all that.
You know what my group does? They ignore everything but the parts that count. In other words, if they want to search an entire corridor for traps, they only get results for the squares which matter.
If the players want to roll, the DM can have the players roll, say, 6 times, and then he secretly rolls 1d6 to pick which result counts.
Agreed. That level of caution has a time and a place. And not "all the time," and "every place." :)
And I should have added in my previous post that I agree with pretty much everything else.
Happy Gaming.
Personally, I'm not a fan of taking 20 for stuff like perception on traps. Basically the way I run it as a DM is that taking 20 means that you're accepting every single roll from 1 all the way through 20. I also use 1's on a skill check as a crit failure, or a fumble. However you want to look at it. So that first 1 on a trapped square would give you the absolute certainty that there's no trap. And the reverse on an untrapped square.
No, it's not the exact RAW. But it's what works for me as a DM, and my group is fine with it.