| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I think the title says it all.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In a home game, all rules are optional.
If you're referring to organised play, it's a core mechanic.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Its a core mechanic but it has a lot of table variation around it, and the design teams not a faq means that it will keep a lot of table variation around it.
NO FAQ Required, on Take 10 wrote:
The point of the Take 10 option is to allow the GM to control the pacing and tension of the game, avoiding having the game bog down with unnecessary and pointless checks, but still calling for checks when the chance of failure leads to tension or drama, as well as when a series of checks would have a nonsensical result if all outcomes were exactly the Take 10 result. To that end, it would be counterproductive to attempt to make a strict ruling on what counts as “immediate danger and distracted” because that’s going to vary based on the pacing and dramatic needs of the moment. The very soul of the Take 10 rule is in the GM’s discretion of when it applies, and tying the GM’s hands, forcing them to allow Take 10 in some cases and disallow it in others would run counter to the point of the rule’s inclusion in the game. The rule is currently flexible enough to allow this, and it should maintain that flexibility.
It is a real rule, but it works more like a guideline since there is no hard stance on how it works. While it may not be an contentious as paladin's falling it is now one of those things you might want to discuss with a GM if you are used to making liberal use of it.
Under skill descriptions:
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.
It is absolutely a core rule. Most cases are very easy to adjudicate. There are some cases where a GM may have to make a ruling.
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
PC: "I'm a decent cook (+5). I've made scrambled eggs (DC 10) every morning for the last several years, even when I was sickened (-2)! I could make them in my sleep if I wanted!"
GM: "I don't allow Take 10 in my home campaigns."
PC: "Well, I guess we're going to Denny's. I just can't figure out how to crack an egg today."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is core enough that there is content in the PHB that augments it. Look at the rogue advanced talent skill mastery.
You do not have to have it in your game if you do not want it, but that is your house rule, not the Pathfinder rules. IMO it serves to help things run smoother when there is no big fight or distraction by ensuring characters can actually perform skills they are trained in and handle everyday tasks. This saves them a fair bit of frustration.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Core
-Nearyn
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Why am I in immediate danger from cooking these eggs?
"Did you notice they were a lot bigger than normal?
"Yeah, whats that got to do with any....
Oh.
In a more simulation-based system, skills would have less variation in simple situations - you could roll 3d6+2 instead of d20, or even d10+10 for simple tasks, but that's not the game system we're using. Take Ten is there so peope don't mess up their scrambled eggs, but it's not there to remove risk when climbing or jumping a pit or the like (in my opinion). Given that player skills generally scale more rapidly than DCs, I think the design team did the right thing leaving it in the GM's hands.
If people don't or can't trust their GMs, the game falls apart. That means both side of the screen have to be reasonable.
Take Ten is there so peope don't mess up their scrambled eggs, but it's not there to remove risk when climbing or jumping a pit or the like (in my opinion).
That is 100% wrong. It's there specifically as "a safety measure," to allow players to remove risk.
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.
Take Ten is there so peope don't mess up their scrambled eggs, but it's not there to remove risk when climbing or jumping a pit or the like (in my opinion).That is 100% wrong. It's there specifically as "a safety measure," to allow players to remove risk.
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.
Rule of drama is a thing now.(What do you mean i need to roll to start the car? Oh hell i'm in a horror movie now aren't I?) If there's no tension in just taking 10 all the way up the mountain the dm might say no taking 10.
On the other hand, the way statistics work if there's any possibility for falling you WILL fall during a long climb
I am reminded of Spacemaster where there is a chance your vehicle won't start...
|
PC: "I'm a decent cook (+5). I've made scrambled eggs (DC 10) every morning for the last several years, even when I was sickened (-2)! I could make them in my sleep if I wanted!"
GM: "I don't allow Take 10 in my home campaigns."
PC: "Well, I guess we're going to Denny's. I just can't figure out how to crack an egg today."
I love your example nefreet. Yes it is a core rule. To riff on Nefreet's example:
example 1 Nefreet, "I'm going to take ten and make scrambled eggs".
Victor, "Great scrambled eggs".
example 2 Nefreet, "I'm going to take ten and make scrambled eggs".
Victor "I'd rather have eggs Benedict".
Nefreet "Where do you think we are? no hollandaise sauce for miles around, eat your eggs and be happy."
example 3 Nefreet, "I'm going to take ten and make scrambled eggs".
Victor, "look out here comes a forest drake!"
(after the forest drake has been killed by the party)
Nefreet "In all the excitement I forgot about the eggs and they are burned".
Basically take ten is a time saving device for mundane tasks that would bog the game down if you had to roll each time. If it can't be done, ie. something isn't there, then it can't be done. And of course imminent danger and distraction, as per the rule, eliminates take ten as a possibility.
example 574 Nefreet, "I'm going to take ten and make scrambled eggs".
Victor, "We have been eating scrambled eggs every morning for over a year. Why can't we have anything else?"
Nefreet, "I'm hoping one of you lazy bums will get the point and learn to cook. I'm tired of doing all the cooking."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Druid or Cavalier's Ostrich lays a giant egg every day [during the season with sufficient sunlight, very low level magic can extend that all year easily], you don't expect the party to waste it do you?
If your druid is laying eggs they've been in bird form WAY too long... and we are NOT eating that.
|
|
The Druid or Cavalier's Ostrich lays a giant egg every day [during the season with sufficient sunlight, very low level magic can extend that all year easily], you don't expect the party to waste it do you?If your druid is laying eggs they've been in bird form WAY too long... and we are NOT eating that.
Maybe it's Loki. People like screwing with Loki, by making him pregnant.
If I am in a game that doesn't allow someone to take 10 for a mundane task whose failure is death, I do not attempt the action. I am the same way in real life. If there was a 5% chance that I died every time I got in my truck, guess what, I would stop driving! I have driven over 300,000 miles with no serious accidents yet. That is much lower than a 5% failure rate.
Heck, that would be 15,000 unfortunate events!
Remember, skills are there to show that you can DO things. They are not there as a combat replacement.
Core.
Remove or change it and you may as well say that CON alters chances of hitting in melee combat.
Core.
Remove or change it and you may as well say that CON alters chances of hitting in melee combat.
That's just silly. We all know CON affects attack rolls. When your CON reaches 0, you automatically miss, no matter how many attempts you make.
:)
Core.
Remove or change it and you may as well say that CON alters chances of hitting in melee combat.
That's just silly. We all know CON affects attack rolls. When your CON reaches 0, you automatically miss, no matter how many attempts you make.
:)
As does INT, WIS, CHA, STR, DEX...
smartass.
