I've got a beef with pg 172 in the PF core book, and it's with Tactical vs Local movement. It's an important topic, because how much ground you cover is tied directly with spell durations and other 'consumables'. What I've found, for most dungeon maps (even pretty big ones) is that Local movement as listed is so high, tracking spell durations is practically irrelevant in most cases. Any effect that is measured in hours might as well be for a full day, if you're abiding by the Local move rates.
In fact, why even publish Local rates at all? They're _exactly _ the same as Tactical movement. It's not a different rate by any means.
I'm tempted to revert back to the rule in old-school D&D: that your out of combat movement rate in a dungeon is vastly different than your combat/tactical movement. Why? Because, this is a "very cautious walking pace indoors".
This makes a certain amount of sense, if you consider it. In darkened, unfamiliar terrain, your movement will be slower relative to busting a move while fighting for your life. Think about it: you're taking time to notice traps, peek carefully around corners, wait on laggards to catch up as your group threads itself through passages, etc. It's a completely different kind of movement compared to your tactical speed.
I think Local Move ought to take longer. In the old game, 120' per ten minutes was the norm for most humanoid races. It seems reasonable to me to use the numbers listed in the Core book, but instead of 1 minute, assume it's for 10 minutes. So, a character with 30' Tactical Move, would have a Local Move of 300' which would consume 10 minutes of time instead of 1.
At the same time, certain things should happen automatically: noticing secret doors, finding traps, and other Perception checks. In other words, just because a player neglects to search for secret doors definitely does not mean the character also forgets. We can assume the party is poking around, being cautious as possible.
Of course, you can always choose to pinpoint a specific area for a search, which would be an additional Perception check.
Anyone else share an opinion on this?
I've got a beef with pg 172 in the PF core book, and it's with Tactical vs Local movement. It's an important topic, because how much ground you cover is tied directly with spell durations and other 'consumables'. What I've found, for most dungeon maps (even pretty big ones) is that Local movement as listed is so high, tracking spell durations is practically irrelevant in most cases. Any effect that is measured in hours might as well be for a full day, if you're abiding by the Local move rates.
In fact, why even publish Local rates at all? They're _exactly _ the same as Tactical movement. It's not a different rate by any means.
I'm tempted to revert back to the rule in old-school D&D: that your out of combat movement rate in a dungeon is vastly different than your combat/tactical movement. Why? Because, this is a "very cautious walking pace indoors".
This makes a certain amount of sense, if you consider it. In darkened, unfamiliar terrain, your movement will be slower relative to busting a move while fighting for your life. Think about it: you're taking time to notice traps, peek carefully around corners, wait on laggards to catch up as your group threads itself through passages, etc. It's a completely different kind of movement compared to your tactical speed.
I think Local Move ought to take longer. In the old game, 120' per ten minutes was the norm for most humanoid races. It seems reasonable to me to use the numbers listed in the Core book, but instead of 1 minute, assume it's for 10 minutes. So, a character with 30' Tactical Move, would have a Local Move of 300' which would consume 10 minutes of time instead of 1.
At the same time, certain things should happen automatically: noticing secret doors, finding traps, and other Perception checks. In other words, just because a player neglects to search for secret doors definitely does not mean the character also forgets. We can assume the party is poking around, being cautious as possible.
Of course, you can always...
I don't use local movement in dungeons, it's always tactical.
The Local and Tactical are the SAME rate, so if you're only using Tactical, you're also using Local. I'm saying they shouldn't be the same rate, though. That's what I'm trying to gauge on the forum ... your opinion on this and what you think of my reasoning.
I believe that the reason tactical and local movements are the same rates is because local is meant to be a time savor. It's so that you don't need the PC to mark out every round of movement when going from one section of a village to another. Also, to extrapolate on my earlier comment, I feel that the dungeon environment is better suited to tactical for the reasons you presented, players have to show how they are looking for traps, peering around corners, etc. Local, IMO, is more for safe areas and longer distance traveling.
300'/10 min. is a VERY slow walking pace. That's about a 5' foot step, followed by 2 full round actions of searching (4 perception rolls).
With a 5 person party, that's moving slow enough to basically take a 20 on every square you traverse. This party will find EVERYTHING!
300'/10 min. is a VERY slow walking pace. That's about a 5' foot step, followed by 2 full round actions of searching (4 perception rolls).
With a 5 person party, that's moving slow enough to basically take a 20 on every square you traverse. This party will find EVERYTHING!
I agree that it's very slow. But, referencing old D&D Cyclopedia, it's still over twice as fast as movement listed for an average person or typical humanoid. So, the speed I'm recommending, while slow, is still faster than what has existed before in the game.
Keep in mind, there's a huge difference in crossing 300' outside, on level ground, in broad daylight VS being inside, in the dark, and in unfamiliar, threatening territory. If you've ever gone caving or have visited a haunted house at Halloween, you'll likely notice a vast decrease in your speed compared to how you normally travel outside.
I disagree that this slower rate equates into taking 20 for every square. The PER checks should be automatic, but simply a normal roll. Keep in mind, I'm talking about a different timescale, not normal combat rounds.
The reason I'm considering this house rule is so that spell durations measured in minutes & hours actually mean something, not to mention other consumed items, like light sources, etc. Otherwise, most maps are simply too small for these things to matter with the listed Local ovement.
300'/10 min. is a VERY slow walking pace. That's about a 5' foot step, followed by 2 full round actions of searching (4 perception rolls).
With a 5 person party, that's moving slow enough to basically take a 20 on every square you traverse. This party will find EVERYTHING!
I agree that it's very slow. But, referencing old D&D Cyclopedia, it's still over twice as fast as movement listed for an average person or typical humanoid. So, the speed I'm recommending, while slow, is still faster than what has existed before in the game.
Keep in mind, there's a huge difference in crossing 300' outside, on level ground, in broad daylight VS being inside, in the dark, and in unfamiliar, threatening territory. If you've ever gone caving or have visited a haunted house at Halloween, you'll likely notice a vast decrease in your speed compared to how you normally travel outside.
I disagree that this slower rate equates into taking 20 for every square. The PER checks should be automatic, but simply a normal roll. Keep in mind, I'm talking about a different timescale, not normal combat rounds.
The reason I'm considering this house rule is so that spell durations measured in minutes & hours actually mean something, not to mention other consumed items, like light sources, etc. Otherwise, most maps are simply too small for these things to matter with the listed Local ovement.
I agree that I walk a little slower indoors than outdoors, But, moving at only half a foot per second gives you plenty of time to examine your surroundings. Moving that slowly while in combat would afford a 5 man party enough time to make 18-20 perception checks between them per 5' of movement. Does it take longer to look around in a cave than in a cave while in combat?
Also, 300'/10 min may be over twice as fast as 2E, but spells only last 1/10 of the time. In 2E a round was 1 min. If you went back to that time scale, then, yeah, you could move 300' in 10 min.
Moving that slowly while in combat would afford a 5 man party enough time to make 18-20 perception checks between them per 5' of movement. Does it take longer to look around in a cave than in a cave while in combat?
Also, 300'/10 min may be over twice as fast as 2E, but spells only last 1/10 of the time. In 2E a round was 1 min. If you went back to that time scale, then, yeah, you could move 300' in 10...
You're still equating the time spent in combat with time spent out of combat. Which is not surprising, since 3.5/PF does this by giving Tactical & Local movement the exact same rate.
But it hasn't always been that way. I'm not sure how 2E handled this, but I'm referring to really old D&D, the Basic/Expert stuff from the early 80s (which is actually too modern for many OD&D purists who still use stuff from the 70s). So, if it was OK then, why is it so bad now?
In other words, in the old game, there was a sharp differentiation between the flow of time in and out of combat. Out of combat, you're not just moving .. you're re-organizing equipment, waiting on stragglers, carefully stepping through the surroundings, cleaning weapons after a combat, etc.
When you say 18-20 PER checks per 5' of movement, I'll take your word on the math. I guess what I"m getting at is that a PER check in the midst of combat (to notice a sneaking backstabber) is altogether a different thing than a PER check to scope out an area for traps or to find a secret door. I personally don't see how a hidden door in a 5' cube could be found in 6 seconds, but that's just me.
Here's a follow-up question for you: do you think it's reaonsable or unreasonable to assume that some actions, like PER checks, take longer out of combat than in?