| 21 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When, if ever, may you take 10 on Stealth checks?
Spinoff from the stealth playtest thread.
I don't think you should be taking 10 when stealth really matters. You're not supposed to do so while in immediate danger.Keep in mind that a lot of the "there are too many rolls" arguments involved being hundreds of feet away.Imagine that a character with +5 to Acrobatics wanting to long jump over a 10-foot-wide gap between two tall buildings (DC 10). He does not want to roll a 4 or less. Can he Take 10?
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.When a person jumps between two buidlings, is he in immediate danger? Yes, if he fails the roll, he will fall and get severely injured. If he succeeds at the roll, he is in no danger. For this example, assume nothing distracts the character, no pursuers, no need for stealth, plenty of time to compose himself. The Take 10 rules also describe "in immediate danger or distracted" as "Distractions or threats," a phrase that does not include the danger of failing the roll. Moreover, the rules describe Taking 10 as "a safety measure." If this is literal rather than a metaphor, it means that Taking 10 is fine if Taking 10 prevents the danger. The character can Take 10 as he jumps between the buildings, because Taking 10 means he has no danger of falling and, therefore, he is not in immediate danger.
Does this argument apply to Stealth?
No.
It ought to have applied, but Stealth has another problem. Stealth checks are opposed die rolls. A single d20 roll against a Difficulty Class threshold has 20 different possible outcomes. Some outcomes are success and the others are failure. Taking 10 selects one definite outcome, and the players and GM can see in advance that it is safely successful. An opposed pair of die rolls have 400 possible outcomes. Taking 10 narrows them down to 20 outcomes, all based on the opposed check. The character Taking 10 in stealth would need a Stealth modifier 11 greater than the opposed Perception modifier to guarantee success. Okay, a 10th-level rogue sneaking past a 1st-level watchman can Take 10. It would be routine for him. But anyone else with a less overwhelming Stealth modifier would be in danger of being spotted even if he Took 10.
Furthermore, questioning why Stealth is an opposed roll is answered with game-design psychology about making the game fun. Rogue versus watchman can be a key confrontation in the adventure. The player wants to do something at key moments, and the iconic act of doing something in D&D and Pathfinder is rolling a die. If the players says, "This is a matter of life and death. So I had better not risk a die roll. I'll take 10," then the drama of the successfully sneaking has just been shot down. The player can still take pride that his rogue is so sneaky that he can treat such a confrontation as routine, but the excitement is lost.
Taking 10 as a solution to too many die rolls would make Stealth less fun for the players.
On the other hand, too many die rolls would make Stealth less fun, too. I sneak down the hallway and I roll for Stealth, I open the door and I roll for Stealth, I carefully scan the room from the doorway and I roll for Stealth, I drink my potion of Spider Climb and I roll for Stealth, I climb toward the skylight in the ceiling and I roll for Stealth, I continue climbing toward the skylight and I roll for Stealth, I open the skylight and I roll for Stealth, I poke my head out the skylight and scan the roof and roll for Stealth--awk! There is a guard on the roof! All those Stealth rolls and only the last one was a confrontation. When almost all Stealth rolls are meaningless, running into a meaningful one is surprise rather than excitement.
IMO nearly anytime you aren't in combat you can take 10.
im·me·di·ate
[ih-mee-dee-it] Show IPA
adjective
1.
occurring or accomplished without delay; instant: an immediate reply.
2.
following or preceding without a lapse of time: the immediate future.
3.
having no object or space intervening; nearest or next: in the immediate vicinity.
4.
of or pertaining to the present time or moment: our immediate plans.
5.
without intervening medium or agent; direct: an immediate cause.
IMO nearly anytime you aren't in combat you can take 10.
If it was supposed to be in combat they could have said in combat.
If a dragon is asleep and you're trying to quietely walk past him to get to the gold you're in danger. A missed stealth roll is going to get you killed as surely as a missed saving throw or jump check over the rising lava.
IMO nearly anytime you aren't in combat you can take 10.If it was supposed to be in combat they could have said in combat.
If a dragon is asleep and you're trying to quietely walk past him to get to the gold you're in danger. A missed stealth roll is going to get you killed as surely as a missed saving throw or jump check over the rising lava.
I don't know if this is directed to me or not (didn't see any quote) but i will answer.
No a missed stealth roll isn't going to get you killed, oh and by the way take 10 doesn't assume a failed roll like take 20 does.And no i don't count trying to walk past a sleeping dragon being in danger, now if the (huge+) dragon is dancing on his cave and you have to move through the space he is dancing in (let's say you have a way to be unseen) then yes that would have been dangerous (not to meantion a good distraction) and you couldn't take 10.
We can all agree the rule is not completely unambiguous.
There is little reason to get personal in defense of your interpretation. Anyone arguing too passionately will be mocked by me. Just state your case and get FAQ'd. :)
|
From the definitions of immediate you have posted, no, you aren't in immediate danger if when you take 10 even if trying to move past a sleeping dragon.
The consequences of your stealth result could place you in immediate danger, but at the time when you take 10 you aren't in immediate danger.
If you fail the stealth check you will not suffer damage immediately (i.e. it will not be
"1. occurring or accomplished without delay; instant: an immediate reply.
2. following or preceding without a lapse of time: the immediate future, 3. having no object or space intervening; nearest or next: in the immediate vicinity.
4. of or pertaining to the present time or moment: our immediate plans.
5. without intervening medium or agent; direct: an immediate cause.")
what will happen immediately is the dragon waking.
You can argue that the following action of the dragon, when his initiative happens, will be to deliver some damage to the guy trying to move quietly, but it is something happening with a perceptible delay in time, so it don't fall under "immediately" at all.
|
|
We can all agree the rule is not completely unambiguous.
There is little reason to get personal in defense of your interpretation. Anyone arguing too passionately will be mocked by me. Just state your case and get FAQ'd. :)
It has already got to the semi-religious level on the other thread, so you can start your mocking already.
I doubt anyone will change his opinion.
Diego , if you can't contribute without insulting then dont.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's keep in mind the another part of the take-10 rule:
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).
A character with Stealth as a class skill, max ranks, and a high dex would probably "expect" an average roll to beat most people's average Perception checks. I would thus assume that they'd probably actually be taking 10 on it most of the time. Only when they think that they might be in some trouble and need to be extra careful would they not take-10.
As for the dragon example... you're not in combat. You're (presumably) not being distracted or threatened. There's no rule that says you can't take-10 if a failure would result in harm (that's take-20). "Immediate danger" is not a game term, it's fluff. Standing next to a sleeping dragon is not immediate danger. Making faces at it is not going to turn you into a snack (assuming its not bluffing). I think you should be allowed to take-10 in that case. Just because its allowed though, doesn't mean its a good idea. Sleeping or not, a dragon will still have Blindsense 60' after all.
Of course, now we have to go back to the Stealth playtest thread to debate what kind of checks and DCs are involved with sneaking up on a sleeping creature with Blindsense. :)
No a missed stealth roll isn't going to get you killed
Technically a missed jump roll over a volcano isn't going to get you killed either. The sudden stop at the bottom on the other hand...
And no i don't count trying to walk past a sleeping dragon being in danger, now if the (huge+) dragon is dancing on his cave and you have to move through the space he is dancing in (let's say you have a way to be unseen) then yes that would have been dangerous (not to meantion a good distraction) and you couldn't take 10.
Why are you in more danger in his square than you are in front of his nose?
The game is built around chance and die rolls. Removing that element from risky endeavors goes against the spirit of the game. The ability to always, consistently, and persistently perform well with no chance of messing up is a 10th level rogue ability. It shouldn't be handed out lightly.
Let's keep in mind the another part of the take-10 rule:
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).
/Thread
Diego , if you can't contribute without insulting then dont.
Yeah, this is more or less exactly what I was trying to avoid. :)
There's no rule that says you can't take-10 if a failure would result in harm (that's take-20)
If failure would result in harm to you that's sort of the definition of immediate danger. The wording is delibrately vauge to have some give, but it has to mean SOMETHING. Sure, when you're on the log on the edge of the cliff failure doesn't kill you, it causes you to fall, which is harmless, and then land, which is harmful. So immediate does not preclude
1) SOME, but not much, passing of time (it would be ridiculous to say that immediate means 0 time, since absolutely nothing can hurt you in 0 time)
2) SOME, but not much, allowance for intermediaries between cause and effect.
Skill Mastery: The rogue becomes so confident in the use of certain skills that she can use them reliably even under adverse conditions.
Upon gaining this ability, she selects a number of skills equal to 3 + her Intelligence modifier. When making a skill check with one of these skills, she may take 10 even if stress and distractions would normally prevent her from doing so. A rogue may gain this special ability multiple times, selecting additional skills for skill mastery to apply to each time.
This implies that stress or distraction do negate the ability to take 10 or else the ability does nothing. Trying to get passed a large red dragon that you can use for an h'orderve is stressful.
Ignoring the whole debate over the interpretation of "immediate danger", personally I just find that opposed rolls result in the game being too 'swingy'. Pretty much the entire game is set up around the principle of rolling a d20 to beat a DC that takes 10: Attack vs AC, Save vs Spell, Skill Check vs. Situation.
IMO, it would be best to resolve all opposed checks in one of two ways:
.
.
1)- The person who is trying to actively oppose a situation is the one who rolls. The other party or the 'situation' takes 10 thus forming a DC. This would mean that when someone tries to penetrate an opponent's defenses, save against an area of effect spell, sneak past a guard, or uncover a hidden assailant, they are the one who rolls.
2)- With the exception of attacks, and saves, the player is always the one who rolls.
Personally, I like option 1 better. It is more internally consistent with other aspects of the rules, is less swingy, more fair, and reduces extraneous die rolls... which in turn allows the action to proceed at a better tempo — something that is generally considered 'more fun'.
Pretty much the entire game is set up around the principle of rolling a d20 to beat a DC that [effectively] takes 10: Attack vs AC, Save vs Spell, Skill Check vs. Situation.
While i like the simplicity of resolving stealth rolls like a combat maneuver check, I don't like condemning a player to failure without giving them a chance to pick up the dice at some point and take polyhedral fate into their own hands, and i HATE having that done to me. I don't want to tell the rogue that the Snake spots him because i rolled the snakes spot check and i don't want to tell the cleric he's been ambushed because i rolled the bugbears stealth roll.
I don't want to tell the rogue that the Snake spots him because i rolled the snakes spot check and i don't want to tell the cleric he's been ambushed because i rolled the bugbears stealth roll.
Actually if you're going by my method #1: If the rogue was attempting to sneak past the snake, then the rogue would be the one rolling. If the bugbears had set up an ambush, then they would be the ones taking 10 on their stealth checks and the cleric would be rolling to detect them.
What if the roles are reversed though?
If you are intent upon letting the players always roll then what happens if the rogue is attempting to hide from the snake? Is the snake simply going to be allowed to take 10 on all of their perceptions checks while the rogue has to keep rerolling until they fail?
If the cleric and company are trying to ambush the bugbears, the ranger and the rogue are probably going to want to leave the cleric and the wizard hog-tied in a cave somewhere else to ensure they can pull of their ambuscades.
What if the roles are reversed though?
Or worse, you have two critters trying to sneak past or up on each other?
If the cleric and company are trying to ambush the bugbears, the ranger and the rogue are probably going to want to leave the cleric and the wizard hog-tied in a cave somewhere else to ensure they can pull of their ambuscades.
Well thats always a risk with stealth: it works better for the NPC's because they're alone/with folks of similar abilities than it does for the PC's. Unless you make your party with the intent of being stealthy you either have to go alone (which brings an evil gleam into the eyes of DM's everywhere)
Am i the only one noting the irony of an off topic discussion from the stealth thread veering back ON topic by being off topic of the off topic....
my head hurts.
Wait, what?
If you're trying to sneak up on something then you need to be aware it is there, thus at least one of the characters has to be aware.
If two rouges are wandering around in the dark I would simply do two sets of opposed rolls, stealth vs perception. If Rouge A fails stealth against Rogue B he sees them and vice versa.
If neither do then neither do, and if they both do they both do.
Admittedly this is probably a house rule, haven't cracked open a book in a while but it seems a fair way of doing it to me.
And with that, I would never allow any PC to take 10 on a stealth check period. There are always consequences for failing. Yes, they may not be immediately lethal but if there were none at all I'd simply say "OK, you sneak around. where are you going?"
This, though it's not necessary in my game due to non-rules lawyer muchkins, would also prevent "OK, why can't I move really slowly and take 20" type arguments as well.
Again, personal interpretation and likely a house rule.
BNW: Not sure why you see my point as OT. It's directly related to the concept behind the take 10 mechanic that Evil Abe brought up.
At any rate, if two critters are trying to sneak up on each other, I would simply be using initiative to resolve who is currently active or passive.
BB: I can tell you from a long history of playing Capture the Flag in first person shooters, that it should indeed be possible for someone to take 10 on stealth checks.
I can't even count how many times I've been able to hide from entire teams of people teleporting all over the place trying to find me while I happily crouch atop a ledge, as minutes tick by until my team returns our own flag.
If sitting there, on my laurels doesn't represent, taking 10 or at least keeping a prior high stealth result from round to round then I don't know what would. And there most certainly would have been dire consequences for failing my stealth check — namely getting fragged and losing a match. If that's not analogous to what we're talking about here, then what is?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMO nearly anytime you aren't in combat you can take 10.
+1
If the PCs say they want to walk through an entire dungeon quietly (and why wouldn't they), the LAST thing I want to do is have every single player rolling a D20 very 30 ft. I also don't want to tell them to suddenly make a stealth check, because that would tip them off that for some reason, it matters in THIS area.
I let everyone take 10, and then find out which of the PCs have the worst stealth (aka, the noisy character). I then use that as the Perception target DC for any monsters or NPCs in the dungeon, to see if they are suprised.
Once we go to initiative, then characters need to roll a stealth check to see if they are stealthy.
Conversely, if someone is "on guard duty", I don't want to make a roll every 6 seconds. I have them take 10 on perception checks until initiative is rolled. Guard duty is monotonous (99.99% of the time, nothing happens), and guards are rarely on heightened alert. Taking the average roll is probably slightly generous to the guards in most situations.
How is it that I start an almost identical thread two hours earlier, but get NO responses whatsoever?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How is it that I start an almost identical thread two hours earlier, but get NO responses whatsoever?
I mean this in the nicest way possible: Your threads have a very distinct reputation.
If the PCs say they want to walk through an entire dungeon quietly (and why wouldn't they), the LAST thing I want to do is have every single player rolling a D20 very 30 ft. I also don't want to tell them to suddenly make a stealth check, because that would tip them off that for some reason, it matters in THIS area.
I let everyone take 10, and then find out which of the PCs have the worst stealth (aka, the noisy character). I then use that as the Perception target DC for any monsters or NPCs in the dungeon, to see if they are suprised.
Once we go to initiative, then characters need to roll a stealth check to see if they are stealthy.
Conversely, if someone is "on guard duty", I don't want to make a roll every 6 seconds. I have them take 10 on perception checks until initiative is rolled. Guard duty is monotonous (99.99% of the time, nothing happens), and guards are rarely on heightened alert. Taking the average roll is probably slightly generous to the guards in most situations.
This is the best method.
I feel like this should be written into the stealth rule, and explained in the GMing chapter.
Heck, I just now decided to put Stealth(10) totals in the headers of all my statblocks, right next to perception.
How is it that I start an almost identical thread two hours earlier, but get NO responses whatsoever?
I simply saw Evil Abe's link in the Stealth Playtest thread and followed that.
How is it that I start an almost identical thread two hours earlier, but get NO responses whatsoever?
I didn't see it.
|
|
How is it that I start an almost identical thread two hours earlier, but get NO responses whatsoever?
Because it wasn't linked in the stealth blog thread.
I didn't see it.
Well it was a stealth thread...
As to the "way too many rolls" problem, simply don't roll until its important. You're sneaking, you're sneaking, you're sneaking, you go down this corridor, up this one, ok, everyone roll...
If the players start metagaming, ask for extraneous rolls.
How is it that I start an almost identical thread two hours earlier, but get NO responses whatsoever?
Because most days i don't want to have to cross reference the players handbook, the apg, grey's anatomy, Fundamentals of knowledge and reality, and websters law dictionary and a better homes and gardens cook book to figure out what loophole you're going to try to use.
Other days, i enjoy the laugh.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
If failure would result in harm to you that's sort of the definition of immediate danger.
This has not changed since 3rd edition.
Because the printed books had examples while the SRD omitted them is not an excuse to ignore those examples.
People did this for empower spell, and people do this for take 10.
The nice example was a fighter climbing being able to take 10 despite the fact that he would take damage should he fail it sufficiently. Then a goblin attacks the fighter. Arguably the fall is going to do more damage to the fighter than 2 critical hits from the goblin. However this prevents him from continuing to take 10 while climbing.
It seems to answer the question fairly well and thus makes for a fine example. It just might not be where people want it to be so they will claim 'this isn't 3rd edition' (yet nothing in the rules on this has changed since then) or 'there is no such wording in the core books' (and that's just because they are taken verbatim from the SRD, which didn't include examples), etc.
-James
BNW, did you have any response to this?
@Evil Lincoln: Clicked the FAQ for you.
BNW, did you have any response to this?
Yes.
Contact Other Plane: Can you Take 10 on the Intelligence check for this spell?
Having your Int and Cha blasted down to 8 by an extraplanar entity is a significant and distracting threat, therefore you can't Take 10 on that check.
—Sean K Reynolds, 03/04/11
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/v5748btpy88yj/faq#v5748eaic9nsy
By what James is saying that wouldn't be the case. The wizard is safe in their study, has plenty of time to prep, and the wizard, and isn't in a rush. The only dangerous thing they're doing is making the check so they shouldn't be able to take 10.
What I'm saying is that if that check itself is dangerous you can't take 10, and that's what that FAQ seems to support.
BNW, did you have any response to this?
Yes.
Contact Other Plane: Can you Take 10 on the Intelligence check for this spell?
Having your Int and Cha blasted down to 8 by an extraplanar entity is a significant and distracting threat, therefore you can't Take 10 on that check.
—Sean K Reynolds, 03/04/11
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/v5748btpy88yj/faq#v5748eaic9nsy
By what James is saying that wouldn't be the case. The wizard is safe in their study, has plenty of time to prep, and the wizard, and isn't in a rus. The only dangerous thing they're doing is making the check so they shouldn't be able to take 10.
What i'm saying is that if that check itself is dangerous you can't take 10, and thats what that FAQ seems to support.
lol. That's one of mine.
Yet another one hits the FAQ.
Seems I have my uses. :D
That sets a bad precedent, IMO, and one that brings the game to a screeching halt.
I don't see how. It doesn't take that long to roll a die.
That suggests there's no more taking 10 Jumping, or Riding, or Acrobatics, or... dang near anything that isnt cerebral
Climbing (when you won't fail by 5 or you're roped onto a piton)
Acrobatics Jumping mud puddles, rivers and what notRiding: showing off in front of your friends, going from town to town, getting home from the bar while drunk,
That sets a bad precedent, IMO, and one that brings the game to a screeching halt.I don't see how. It doesn't take that long to roll a die.
That suggests there's no more taking 10 Jumping, or Riding, or Acrobatics, or... dang near anything that isnt cerebralClimbing (when you won't fail by 5 or you're roped onto a piton)
Acrobatics Jumping mud puddles, rivers and what not
Riding: showing off in front of your friends, going from town to town, getting home from the bar while drunk,
So the obvious solution is to have the party Wizard cast illusions to make the 100' pit look like a mud puddle or the sleeping dragon look like a rock, that way you can jump/sneak past them without getting vertigo/wetting yourself.
Falling hurts you.
Contact other plane deals ability score damage.
To me, the distinction is whether or not the failed check could result in a threat to you. As a GM, I feel that "getting caught" is not a threat in and of itself.
I think the opposite stance is to take "threat" to mean "threat of failure" rather than "threat of bodily harm".
I'm not sure which one is correct, but I know that Stealth seems to work more appropriately under the first interpretation.
|
|
Ick. That sets a bad precedent, IMO, and one that brings the game to a screeching halt. That suggests there's no more taking 10 Jumping, or Riding, or Acrobatics, or... dang near anything that isnt cerebral (and some that are, seeing as how this was an Int check)Contact Other Plane: Can you Take 10 on the Intelligence check for this spell?
Having your Int and Cha blasted down to 8 by an extraplanar entity is a significant and distracting threat, therefore you can't Take 10 on that check.
—Sean K Reynolds, 03/04/11
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/v5748btpy88yj/faq#v5748eaic9nsy
Distractions or threats (such as combat) make it impossible for a character to take 10.
There are two things you must consider:
1)"You must concentrate on maintaining the spell (a standard action) in order to ask questions at the rate of one per round." So a distracting thing you are doing while the spell last.
2) "Avoid Int/Cha Decrease: You must succeed on an Intelligence check against this DC to avoid a decrease in Intelligence and Charisma." So you aren't in potential danger if you fail the check, you are under a direct attack, even if involuntary, by that intellect vastly more powerful than your that you have contacted.
So SKR ruling is not problematic. He is recognizing that you are under a direct attack and so you can't take 10.
The rules text that ZappoHisbane cited seems to me to indicate that you can take 10 on a skill even if failure is a negative consequence (as opposed to a benign "whoops, you wasted a few seconds there"). It could be specified more clearly, but I interpret "safety measure" and "fear a poor roll might fail" to mean that harm or other negative consequence is possible on failure. Taking 10 benefits characters that heavily invest in their ranks, and doesn't help in particularly tense situations.
Note that taking 10 does not invalidate the rogue talent, as it allows further uses of taking 10, i.e. in combat and when directly threatened, as opposed to "indirectly threatened".
Edit: Man, I was totally wrong about the ability score checks. That paragraph took 20 on its stealth check! Removed it.
The simple answer: You can take 10 on stealth when no one is looking. (DM discretion)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When, if ever, may you take 10 on Stealth checks?
I never take 10 on Stealth, but I take 10 on the opposed Perception checks. Otherwise, there is too much variability and Stealth becomes almost impossible, especially if a lot of enemies are passing.
(For example, when Frodo and Sam are outside the gates huddled under their elven cloak. That scene would have been impossible if both Frodo and the enemies were both rollings D20s, they would have gotten caught).
Taking 10 on perception is kind of like taking a base 10 AC in combat. We take for granted the (speed of) taking a base 10 AC for defense, but imagine if we rolled our defense each and every attack as well? How long that would take? And the variability would be too high.
So in general, when it comes to opposed rolls, I take 10, and PCs only roll Perception and Sense Motive if they specifically ask or expect something.
My 2 cents.
|
|
Ick. The take-10 mechanic seems to be the most misunderstood rules in the whole game. Every time this comes up people take all sorts of ideas from the take-20 mechanic and think they apply to taking 10. The whole reason the wording for penalties for failure are in take-20 is because it's assumed you are retrying 20 times in a row, and if a failure hurts you that means you can't do it. A take-10 isn't a repeated attempt though, it's one careful attempt.
The whole point of taking 10 is to let you take a mediocre roll when you know that a poor roll will hurt you (or kill you).
It's the 2' chasm you need to jump across in a dungeon. It's a mile deep so a fall will kill you, but it's not very wide. There's nobody around, so you can cautiously approach the edge of the rift, gauge the distance, and carefully jump to the other side. That's taking 10.
Now if you were being chased by a swarm of goblins and happen across the same chasm, you no longer have the benefit of cautiously approaching the chasm and might trip or stumble because they're throwing rocks at you, causing you to fall into the pit. No taking 10 here.
This has been the way it's explained in every Player's Handbook since 3.0.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
IMHO: You can take 10 on any non-UMD skill as long as you aren't in immediate danger not including any dangerous situation which might result from failing the skill check in question.
So, to illustrate my opinion:
Disable Device on a common trap found during normal dungeon crawling: You can take 10, even though if you fail the roll the trap could hurt you.
Disable Device on a trap while combat's going on near you and combatants are aware of you and such: You can't take 10, because you are in immediate danger besides that of the trap itself.
Disable Device on a trap while combat isn't going on, but some other persistent environmental danger is present (for example you're disabling a faulty planks trap on a Temple of Doom style rope bridge, while there's also sporadic gusting winds which could possibly knock you off the bridge on a blown Reflex save): You can't take 10, because you are immediate danger besides that of the trap itself.
While the rule as written is somewhat ambiguous, I feel that this interpretation is most true to the spirit the designers seemed to be trying to convey.
To answer the original question, I think you can generally take 10 on Stealth, except during combat (sniping etc.) or if in some other danger beyond blown Stealth (you're sneaking across the Fireswamp from the Princess Bride.)
|
|
When, if ever, may you take 10 on Stealth checks?
Spinoff from the stealth playtest thread.
Trying to get cookies from the cookie jar :)
I don't see how. It doesn't take that long to roll a die.
But it generally weakens skill-based characters a fair bit (because you need a lot more ranks to be guaranteed success on easy rolls), and frankly they're already probably the weakest classes in anything but an almost-no-combat game.
Therefore I think it makes sense to round in favor of the ruling that makes them better rather than worse, since they need the help.
I don't see how. It doesn't take that long to roll a die.But it generally weakens skill-based characters a fair bit (because you need a lot more ranks to be guaranteed success on easy rolls), and frankly they're already probably the weakest classes in anything but an almost-no-combat game.
Therefore I think it makes sense to round in favor of the ruling that makes them better rather than worse, since they need the help.
I can't see one of the rogues' signature abilities being of much use then, as you'd be handing it out to everyone.
I can't see one of the rogues' signature abilities being of much use then, as you'd be handing it out to everyone.
I don't see how. It doesn't take that long to roll a die.But it generally weakens skill-based characters a fair bit (because you need a lot more ranks to be guaranteed success on easy rolls), and frankly they're already probably the weakest classes in anything but an almost-no-combat game.
Therefore I think it makes sense to round in favor of the ruling that makes them better rather than worse, since they need the help.
No, because Skill Mastery: Stealth is still useful in Combat, like its always been. If there are conditions in Combat that allow use of the Stealth skill (concealment or cover, not going to hash out the other Stealth thread all over), everyone can take advantage of them, sure. Only the Rogue with Skill Mastery can do it in Combat. Oh, and likewise with Acrobatics for moving about without an Aoo, jumping etc. Bluff checks for Feinting. Intimidate to demoralize, for those thuggish Rogues out there. Escape Artist for being Grappled. Do I have to go on? Skill Mastery still has plenty of value.
No, because Skill Mastery: Stealth is still useful in Combat, like its always been. If there are conditions in Combat that allow use of the Stealth skill (concealment or cover, not going to hash out the other Stealth thread all over), everyone can take advantage of them, sure. Only the Rogue with Skill Mastery can do it in Combat. Oh, and likewise with Acrobatics for moving about without an Aoo, jumping etc. Bluff checks for Feinting. Intimidate to demoralize, for those thuggish Rogues out there. Escape Artist for being Grappled. Do I have to go on? Skill Mastery still has plenty of value.
+1. Or in other conditions which are dangerous beyond failing the roll itself. A pretty common one I've seen in a recent campaign is: environmental conditions are damaging the rogue every round. Skill mastery lets him take 10 on Disable Device to pick the lock of the door to get out of that room there; my version of the rules doesn't.
Skill Mastery has plenty of good uses without having to set up your rules to make every rogue that doesn't have it suck. A rogue is drastically more powerful if he can take ten 90% of the time instead of basically never (because almost all of his skills are the kind that failing hurts you in some way), in part because of his mix of skills, and in part because he has enough skill points to set up more situations in which taking ten is an autosuccess instead of an autofail.
NorseWolf, I'm not saying a case can't be made for your interpretation, but I wouldn't play a class with more than 2+Int skill points per level in your game -- the casters and meatheads are WAY proportionately stronger than the skill characters than in my game. It's a big, big deal. It's like giving the wizard +3 or -3 caster levels just for the hell of it.