Since the bard has abilities that allow him to take 10 and/or 20 in special circumstances, I guess they forgot it or left it out for some other reason. I don't think they want to get rid of it.
The default assumption with the Pathfinder Beta is that anything not in the rules is assumed to be unchanged from 3.5. If Beta says nothing about taking 10 and 20, you should assume that the 3.5 rules apply.
The default assumption with the Pathfinder Beta is that anything not in the rules is assumed to be unchanged from 3.5. If Beta says nothing about taking 10 and 20, you should assume that the 3.5 rules apply.
What probably should change, though, is how spelled-out the Take-10 and Take-20 rules are. Every DM I ran into in 3.5 seemed to have different takes on it.
-Matt
How so, Matt? They seem fairly straight-forward to me.
The only questions I've seen are along the lines of: "Can I take 20 on X?" For instance, taking 20 on Hide to plan an ambush; there's no penalty for failure, but maybe you can't even make a Hide check before someone is looking at you.
|
One of the funny implications of taking 20 on a Search check: what you're looking for is always in the last place you look.
But yeah, since there are references to the take 10 and take 20 rules in the text I assume they just happened to overlook the issue. I'm sure they'll fix it in later iterations. :)
|
I notice that there is no provision in PF to take 10 or 20 on a skill check..was this deliberate or just an omission...do PCs get no reward for being careful now or is it just roll the dice and hope for the best especially with traps.
I am against take 20, especially for traps.
First take 20 is only possible in situations where there is no stress.There should ALWAYS be stress in dismantling a trap.
Then, it takes way from the old school gaming feel of it's a trap, OMG, to "meh it's a trap. Let the rogue take 20 and let's move on after a real challenge".
|
I thought that if there was a penalty for failure (i.e. missing by more than 5 sets off the trap) then you couldn't take 20. You can take 20 on search but not on disable device.
This is correct. If there is no danger of harm or other penalty then you can take 20. There is a big difference between looking for a trap and trying to get in there and take it apart.
Searching you can take 20 on
Disabling on the other hand is a roll of the die. Good luck, it was nice to meet you.
How so, Matt? They seem fairly straight-forward to me.
What exactly is a "stressful situation" or a "consequence of failure" is up to the DM.
For example, can you take 20 on a diplomacy check? What about taking 10 to convince the king to spare your friend from the gallows? What about a hide (stealth) check if nobody is looking for you at the moment? How about using Disable Device to rig a wagon wheel to fall off, provided you have a whole day to do it?
|
Just remember that when taking 20 with Search (or Perception), you're basically taking 2 minutes for every 5 ft. square. So if there's a single 5x5 closet, that's not bad. 3 walls and 1 floor = about 8 minutes. But when you get into bigger rooms, maybe 20x20....that's 16 floor pieces and 16 wall pieces, or 32 x 2....just over an hour.
Get ready with those random encounter/patrol rolls!
|
|
There should ALWAYS be stress in dismantling a trap.
Then, it takes way from the old school gaming feel of it's a trap, OMG, to "meh it's a trap. Let the rogue take 20 and let's move on after a real challenge".lol. What do Demolitions teams do, then, rush through as quickly as possible in the hopes they get it right?
I'm confused on that. Would you please clarify?
Sure.
Modern day demolition teams don't exist in a fantasy world (well, not usually), and traps as described in D&D don't exist in real life.
Besides, are your heroes really supposed to be experts in traps (as a demolition team is IRL) in your campaign world ?
Also, even experts in explosives roll fumbles IRL. We've had a few case like this recently where I live with explosive experts blowing up their own house accidentally, and setting fire to the neighborhood as an added bonus...
My opinion is based on seeing so many Living Greyhawk games turn "meh" as soon as a trap was mentioned, and then seeing adventures authors stopping to include the traps altogether.
If you let the take 20 rule in, all traps become either useless, or need DCs ridiculously high to be effective at all. neither is a good thing in my opinion, and prevents the use of quite a few good old modules.
I prefer traps with lower DCs, but with an element of randomness, allowing PCs to spot/disarm them more easily, but with no chance of guaranteed success.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
The "Take 20" option is supposed to simulate someone trying something over and over again until they get it right, if possible. It's to keep players from literally rolling until they get a result of "20".
So, what happens if the player rolls a "1"? Is that bad enough for the explosives to detonate? If so, then the PC's can't Take 20, because there would be a bad result on a failure.
Maybe your problem isn't with the Take 20 mechanic. Maybe your problem is with traps that can't be accidentally sprung by poor Disable Device rolls.
I am against take 20, especially for traps.
First take 20 is only possible in situations where there is no stress.There should ALWAYS be stress in dismantling a trap.
Then, it takes way from the old school gaming feel of it's a trap, OMG, to "meh it's a trap. Let the rogue take 20 and let's move on after a real challenge".
IMO taking 20 should NEVER be allowed on traps. There is always a risk of something going wrong.
What exactly is a "stressful situation" or a "consequence of failure" is up to the DM.
No it's not. If there are "consequences to failure" it's spelled out in the skill description, like with Climb for example. Also very important in this regard is the "Try Again" part of the skill description. If it says you can try again as you want, you can take 20. The Try Again part of Diplomacy for example says that generally retrying a failed check doesn't get you anywhere, so obviously you can't take 20.
I think the rule is quite concise.
I think the rule is quite concise.
It can be too concise. From past experience, the rules work as written, and are quite clear, but they are also spread out over a range of places.
An entry of "retry?" on the skills trable would be a god send. No retry, no take 10/20.
An entry of "retry?" on the skills trable would be a god send. No retry, no take 10/20.
Yes, a retry entry on every skill would be useful. But that won't and shouldn't stop a character from taking 10, just from taking 20. Taking 10 is just a shortcut way of handling semi-routine stuff without taking the time to roll, under situations where the PC can be expected to achieve average results. Retry has nothing to do with taking 10.
|
|
"One of the funny implications of taking 20 on a Search check: what you're looking for is always in the last place you look."
Uh, that's when I stop looking...
I was referring to the fact that whenever you take 20 on a Search check you effectively search for it 20 times and only find it on that twentieth go. ;)
|
|
How so, Matt? They seem fairly straight-forward to me.What exactly is a "stressful situation" or a "consequence of failure" is up to the DM.
For example, can you take 20 on a diplomacy check? What about taking 10 to convince the king to spare your friend from the gallows? What about a hide (stealth) check if nobody is looking for you at the moment? How about using Disable Device to rig a wagon wheel to fall off, provided you have a whole day to do it?
no, no, what's the point, no.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16
|
I am against take 20, especially for traps.
First take 20 is only possible in situations where there is no stress.There should ALWAYS be stress in dismantling a trap.
Then, it takes way from the old school gaming feel of it's a trap, OMG, to "meh it's a trap. Let the rogue take 20 and let's move on after a real challenge".IMO taking 20 should NEVER be allowed on traps. There is always a risk of something going wrong.
You can always take 20 on the Search... it's the disable device check that you can't take 20 on.
|
|
You can always take 20 on the Search... it's the disable device check that you can't take 20 on.
I am against take 20, especially for traps.
First take 20 is only possible in situations where there is no stress.There should ALWAYS be stress in dismantling a trap.
Then, it takes way from the old school gaming feel of it's a trap, OMG, to "meh it's a trap. Let the rogue take 20 and let's move on after a real challenge".IMO taking 20 should NEVER be allowed on traps. There is always a risk of something going wrong.
I've always ruled that you cannot Take 20 on a Search for traps, as there is the possibility you set off a trap while searching.
And yes, no Take 20 on Disable Device - if you fail by 5 or more you set off the trap. Another thing to remember with Take 20 is that you multiply the time required by 20 (so for things like Disable Device in PRPG this could mean from 2 to 16 minutes).
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
Until we see a revised version in PRPG, 'Take 20' will be based on the PHB:
"Since taking 20 assumes that the charactr will fail many times before succeeding, if you did attempt to take 20 on a skill that carries penalties for failure (for instance, a Disable Device check to disarm a trap), you character would automatically incur those penalities before he or she could complete the task (in this case, the character would most likely set off the trap)." (PHB p. 65)
No ambiguity there. If a player said to me "I'm taking 20 on the trap" I'd say "Roll a reflex save."
|
|
I was referring to the fact that whenever you take 20 on a Search check you effectively search for it 20 times and only find it on that twentieth go. ;)"One of the funny implications of taking 20 on a Search check: what you're looking for is always in the last place you look."
Uh, that's when I stop looking...
You could always roll a d20 to determine on which round the 20 occurred. But then, most folk aren't actually looking for just a 20...
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
Just remember that when taking 20 with Search (or Perception), you're basically taking 2 minutes for every 5 ft. square. So if there's a single 5x5 closet, that's not bad. 3 walls and 1 floor = about 8 minutes. But when you get into bigger rooms, maybe 20x20....that's 16 floor pieces and 16 wall pieces, or 32 x 2....just over an hour.
Get ready with those random encounter/patrol rolls!
Yeah, we have a house rule that says if you are taking 20 to search a room, it takes 20 minutes. This leads to a lot of issues regarding wandering monsters. Plus, if the adventure is on a time table, it tends to discourage the take 20 option from the party.
|
|
I've always ruled that you cannot Take 20 on a Search for traps, as there is the possibility you set off a trap while searching.
I would only do that if there really was a chance for setting off the trap while searching (ie, a possible outcome from the actual roll they made). I can imagine some traps where that might be the case (say a trap that was activated by more weight than the searcher actually weighed). Alternatively, a penalty for searching gingerly might be applied (which would obviously reduce the actual outcome even on a take 20).
"One of the funny implications of taking 20 on a Search check: what you're looking for is always in the last place you look."
... which happens to be in the first place you looked but somehow missed it then. I find the connection very evocative!
Sean K Reynolds has an excellent write-up about this very subject, and what you can and can't take 20 on:
http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/take20.html
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Not the "you can't take 20 on Searching for traps" argument again.
Sigh.
You can under the RAW. Take a look at the relevant skills: Disable Device lists a consequence for failure; Search does not. I want to say this is in the FAQ too.
Or, as I say to my children "Look with your eyes, not your hands."
Now, let us all agree to never speak of this again.