Tracking is meant to be pretty easy as it's low level stuff and can be circumvented pretty easily as well.
The DC sounds a bit off though.
Hiding a trail is +5 DC and you move at half-speed (by RAW)
I'd rule that a swamp is more like hard ground if you keep to a body of water - which would bump it to DC 20 to start with.
I am pretty liberal with circumstance adjustments to DC for tracking based on terrain, ground consistency, time passed, wind, rain, dust storms, whatever.
Tracking in a swamp would be pretty hard if you were tracking more than half an hour after the person you are tracking went through. Swamp plants recover fast and finding rapidly dissolving muddy tracks beneath a few inches of water is no picnic.
I'd rule that a swamp is more like hard ground if you keep to a body of water - which would bump it to DC 20 to start with.How would a swamp be "hard ground"?
I believe he was implying that the tracks might be underwater. It's a DC 20 for tracking through flowing water. I'd say murky swamp water might present something of an obstacle depending on the depth and turbidity of the water. I might use the poor visibility modifiers to simulate these conditions
I believe he was implying that the tracks might be underwater. It's a DC 20 for tracking through flowing water. I'd say murky swamp water might present something of an obstacle depending on the depth and turbidity of the water. I might use the poor visibility modifiers to simulate these conditions
Got it in one :)
Also, unless the trackers were moving at half speed as well - there's another +5 bump on the DC
In a swamp, I can see the following modifiers being applied:
Hard ground DC20 (tracks in water)
hide trail +5
fresh snow +10 (this to represent the silt and dirt in the water, where you can't see the bottom)
fog +3 (this to represent the limited vision / sight lines in a swamp)
every hour rain +1 (to represent the vibrant living nature of the swamp - other living creatures, plants swaying, etc)
So, I could see a DC of 35 to 38 right outside of the hamlet, increasing by +1 per hour.
So, no, I would not say that tracking is too easy. As long as you remember to apply all of the appropriate modifiers.
In a swamp, I can see the following modifiers being applied:
Hard ground DC20 (tracks in water)
hide trail +5
fresh snow +10 (this to represent the silt and dirt in the water, where you can't see the bottom)
fog +3 (this to represent the limited vision / sight lines in a swamp)
every hour rain +1 (to represent the vibrant living nature of the swamp - other living creatures, plants swaying, etc)So, I could see a DC of 35 to 38 right outside of the hamlet, increasing by +1 per hour.
So, no, I would not say that tracking is too easy. As long as you remember to apply all of the appropriate modifiers.
I'm not sure I can disagree with you much more on your DC. Swamp is easier to track than normal forest terrain. Footprints stick arround much longer and are much deeper than most other terrain. I have personally found footprints I made years later. Its difficult to not leave a trail. I would definetely start it at DC10. You don't have flowing water in most swamps to apply the "fresh snow" penalty that you have, and that level of standing water does not obscur tracks well. I would also apply a penalty to hiding the trail, since you usually have to either go over open terrain that will hold your tracks or trailblaise a new path. I could definetely see the sight penalty.
I think the big thing is that hiding the trail is a set DC for a set bonus. I think this should be an opposed roll of some kind, or at least scaling. Something like +5, +1 per 5 over the DC.
I'm not sure I can disagree with you much more on your DC. Swamp is easier to track than normal forest terrain. Footprints stick arround much longer and are much deeper than most other terrain. I have personally found footprints I made years later. Its difficult to not leave a trail. I would definetely start it at DC10. You don't have flowing water in most swamps to apply the "fresh snow" penalty that you have, and that level of standing water does not obscur tracks well. I would also apply a penalty to hiding the trail, since you usually have to either go over open terrain that will hold your tracks or trailblaise a new path. I could definetely see the sight penalty.
I guess that we have different definitions of swamps. I think of either knee to chest deep water between hillocks (that are often plant/tree based) - never much fun to tramp thru. Or, I think of the Everglades, where people ride around on those big fan bladed/propelled swamp boats.
Just one thing I would add from my own experience as player and GM. There was mention above about taking 10 and taking 20. In games I've played both of these are not really options when it comes to Tracking.
Taking 10 is feasible but the amount of time you are considered to be using to do one task is significant. Also the rules mention not being in danger or distracted. To me, tracking a rival party through the woods is filled with plenty of distractions. If a PC (or NPC) were to Take 10 while tracking, I would say that they get no Perception checks to notice any surprises around them (and would then start combat surprised consequently) if they're that focused on tracking.
Taking 20 is not allowed for Tracking in games I play and run in. Per the rules you can Take 20 in situations where there is no risk associated with failure. When Tracking you could easily mistake trail sign and start going in the wrong direction, you could get lost, you could accidently follow the tracks of a dire boar by mistake and end up getting gored, all sorts of risks. Because there could indeed be a penalty for failure, taking 20 on Tracking is out.
Some people might not look at it this way but just my 2 cents.
I'm not sure I can disagree with you much more on your DC. Swamp is easier to track than normal forest terrain. Footprints stick arround much longer and are much deeper than most other terrain. I have personally found footprints I made years later. Its difficult to not leave a trail. I would definetely start it at DC10. You don't have flowing water in most swamps to apply the "fresh snow" penalty that you have, and that level of standing water does not obscur tracks well. I would also apply a penalty to hiding the trail, since you usually have to either go over open terrain that will hold your tracks or trailblaise a new path. I could definetely see the sight penalty.I guess that we have different definitions of swamps. I think of either knee to chest deep water between hillocks (that are often plant/tree based) - never much fun to tramp thru. Or, I think of the Everglades, where people ride around on those big fan bladed/propelled swamp boats.
Now I would not consider either of those swamp. Marshland and bayou, but not swamp. Swamp I consider very damp, soil that has trapped moisture, but is not flooded. The water table is at ground level, but not over it. You take a step and you may be ankle or knee deep in muck that smells of decay because it is mostly organic matter. Water seeps in through your shoe and every step leaves a footprint that quickly fills with water, leaving a trail of small foot-shaped puddles behind you. You may lose your boots because of the suction as you randomly hit a pocket of loose soil and sink in.
Edit: Guess its all a matter of your perception. This type of thing is highly colored by where you grow up and your previous experiences, and could lead to very different expectations. A good reason for the GM to be descriptive.
There IS no proper definition of swamp. I spent a year in a soil lab working with soil scientists in wetlands, which included some time in various marshes/wetlands. A swamp, using a wetland scientist's definition, is an American term for a wetland that is at least partially wooded. The common usage of the term is identical to your basic marsh.
/scientific pseudo-mini-rant
|
I think the big thing is that hiding the trail is a set DC for a set bonus. I think this should be an opposed roll of some kind, or at least scaling. Something like +5, +1 per 5 over the DC.
That is intersteing, I am mulling this around in my head. A level 20 ranger or druid who has been tracking beasts his whole career should be better at getting rid of his tracks. An opposed Survival check, to cover and track the party.
In my head it sounds good but when you add the multipliers is gets odd: How would you add the bonuses for soft ground, one hour leadtime and party of 3+ (DC12 in above example) let's assume both rangers have a survival skill of +10:
First ranger is hiding tracks:
Hiding tracks in soft ground DC10 [or is it harder to hide them DC20?] +1 hour lead time (-1)
3+ party members -1
DC is 10 [20 if you think is should be harder for soft ground]
a roll of 10+10 skill is a 20 beating the DC by 10
Second ranger is tracking:
Finding tracks in soft ground DC 10
+1 hour lead time
3+ members in party
+10 DC for opposed check
DC is now 20 to find the tracks
a roll of 10 +10 will find the tracks, checking every hour, the trackign ranger will find the trai labout half time and lose it about half the time. That seems more feasible. Naturally this is a houserule for me and not as written nor probably intended. Still it is kind of interesting as a level 20 ranger would be better at hiding tracks than a level 5 ranger would be at finding them, and that makes sense to me. (opinions may vary and feedback is welcome)
Now I would not consider either of those swamp. Marshland and bayou, but not swamp.
Bayou, that's the word I was looking for :)
Taking 10 is feasible but the amount of time you are considered to be using to do one task is significant.
Just wanted to point out that Taking 10 takes exactly the same amount of time on a skill check as rolling the die does (generally a standard action). There is no penalty to time to Take 10 as there is with Take 20.
A "bayou" is a slow-moving stream or river. Bayous are common in marshy, swampy terrain, but swamp is to bayou as meadow is to stream.
There is surely room to interpret what the word "swamp" means, so it would help to know what the actual terrain was like since different levels of water saturation are all within the range of the word "swamp."
If the terrain is mostly mud with some pools of standing water and only sparse plant life, then tracking would be very easy, even with a long period of time between the tracker and the trackee. If the terrain is mostly standing water with extensive plant life then tracking would be virtually impossible after a relatively short time.
The GM should know what level of swampiness he is dealing with and set the DC accordingly.
|
|
Rather than discussing what is and is not a swamp, the Core Rulebook simply uses "hardness of ground" to measure base DC:
Very Soft Ground: Any surface (fresh snow, thick dust, wet
mud) that holds deep, clear impressions of footprints.
Soft Ground: Any surface soft enough to yield to pressure,
but firmer than wet mud or fresh snow, in which a creature
leaves frequent but shallow footprints.
Firm Ground: Most normal outdoor surfaces (such as
lawns, fields, woods, and the like) or exceptionally soft or
dirty indoor surfaces (thick rugs and very dirty or dusty
f loors). The creature might leave some traces (broken
branches or tufts of hair), but it leaves only occasional or
partial footprints.
Hard Ground: Any surface that doesn’t hold footprints at
all, such as bare rock or an indoor f loor. Most streambeds
fall into this category, since any footprints left behind are
obscured or washed away. The creature leaves only traces
(scuff marks or displaced pebbles).
So if the "swamp/marsh/bayou" leaves frequent but shallow footpints it is soft ground; DC=10.
So if the "swamp/marsh/bayou" leaves frequent but shallow footpints it is soft ground; DC=10.
If you go only by RAW then I suppose that's as close as you can get. Luckily as the GM I can decide when RAW is too restrictive, too arbitrary or too inaccurate and make my own ruling.
Rather than discussing what is and is not a swamp, the Core Rulebook simply uses "hardness of ground" to measure base DC:
So if the "swamp/marsh/bayou" leaves frequent but shallow footpints it is soft ground; DC=10.
That is what the discussion has turned to. Which entry to use.
If you note that the one for hard ground also covers streambeds, you can see how the description of the ground will affect how hard or easy it is to track.
Wait a minute, get back here! We weren't done discussing this into the ground, trolling, ranting, and committing logical fallacies! This thread can't be over already!
So we exercised the Tracking rules tonight, and either we're missing something, or tracking is virtually a no-fail activity for anything with class levels that grants Survival as a class skill. Doubly so for a Ranger.
Tracking four or five people moving through what's basically firm mud shouldn't be very hard for anyone who's even familiar with the concept (DC 9, wisdom 10 character with no training can take 10 and follow), and someone who's good at it shouldn't even have to try (DC 14 to stroll along, which can easily be met at 1st level. DC 19 to jog while following the trail, which can be done at 1st by an expert (+2 wisdom, +3 class skill, 1 rank, +3 skill focus). Hiding the trail puts it out of reach of the untrained dabbler, makes the knowledgeable one have to slow down and take it carefully, and even the expert will have to fall back to his normal move speed.
Following a single animal moving through the woods is harder, but doable. It starts at DC 14 (-1 for large) then goes up. If you don't know what you're doing, you can't even attempt it, since the DC is over 10.
Sure, for 10th level ranger, tracking a week-old trail made by a mouse on a wooden floor might be possible (DC 31 for a Diminutive creature), but by 10th level you're already in "more than ordinary" territory.
I don't think the difficulties are too hard - you just were a very easy target to track.
|
Just one thing I would add from my own experience as player and GM. There was mention above about taking 10 and taking 20. In games I've played both of these are not really options when it comes to Tracking.
Taking 10 is feasible but the amount of time you are considered to be using to do one task is significant. Also the rules mention not being in danger or distracted. To me, tracking a rival party through the woods is filled with plenty of distractions. If a PC (or NPC) were to Take 10 while tracking, I would say that they get no Perception checks to notice any surprises around them (and would then start combat surprised consequently) if they're that focused on tracking.
Taking 20 is not allowed for Tracking in games I play and run in. Per the rules you can Take 20 in situations where there is no risk associated with failure. When Tracking you could easily mistake trail sign and start going in the wrong direction, you could get lost, you could accidently follow the tracks of a dire boar by mistake and end up getting gored, all sorts of risks. Because there could indeed be a penalty for failure, taking 20 on Tracking is out.
Some people might not look at it this way but just my 2 cents.
As has been mentioned, Take 10 doesn't take any more time than rolling for the characters. I don't understand distraction and danger to apply here, but recognize that there is a lot of variance about this in how people approach it. Take 10 for tracking seems fine for me. As for the forbidding Perception checks, the Perception skill has a +5 to the DC if the creature (the tracker in this case) is distracted. That distraction is distraction from the Perception activity; in this case it is the tracking. This seems to be a reasonable way to handle it.
Regarding Take 20, the potentiality for what happens on a failure to forbid Take 20 needs to be tied to the task at hand, on the basis of what happens if the worst failure occurs for the task. Climbing can't take 20 if a 1 would result in falling, because falling is the directly resulting penalty for failure. Running into nasty creatures isn't a direct result of failure, for example. It might happen, but isn't a direct consequence. On the other hand, Take 20 takes 20 times as long. While most skill checks are a standard action, retrying tracking takes an hour, so Take 20 for tracking would take 20 hours. This pretty much makes it moot.
I take a broader view that it isn't just 'following tracks' but Tracking in the broader sense.
A good example of whats (unbelieveably!) possible is here:
A few episodes and you will quickly just accept the DC's :P