|
We appear to be drifting into T20 rules and example again. I kind of wanted to keep this unique to T10 rules - there is enough bleed across and confusing these rules as it is.
LOL! that's assuming I have any control over where this thread is going.
;)
LOL! Dear Nosig, Please guide this thread on the path of answers , for it be just....
while it is a good idea to try to only explain the T10 rules, too many people have the two mixed up in their heads. Thus sometimes you have to use the T20 rules to show the difference.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Cleric's T10 climb is now dependent on if the wizard is able to get in there to help....
Clarification: the cleric's success on a T10 climb is now dependent on if the wizard can help.
Also, the fighter's pretty lame if he's got -6 to climb. He either has non-masterwork full plate or has MW full plate and a MW heavy shield/non-MW light shield that he refused to take off long enough to climb the rope... and also has only a 10 STR and no ranks in climb (which is a class skill). He deserves to be hauled up in a packing crate.
Huh. After reading this thread, now I really wonder why the heck that Bard "lore master" ability exists...
|
Since you don't auto-fail skill checks on 1's, it's quite possible to be so good at something you can roll a 1 and succeed. (Even UMD only has special rules for a 1 when that results in a failure, with nothing special if it was successful.) So 5% failure rate isn't really relevant to the ability to take 10.
Well... that's why I said the simplest climbs for her (and I dunno how many times I've corrected my players when they think they've failed because they rolled a 1 on a skill check... or succeeded because they rolled a 20).
Figuring nothing else contributing, you need to be 10th level to have 10 ranks in the skill to climb. That's a pretty experienced character with more than a passing investment in climbing. Looking at the DC's, I'd be a little upset if that's what I could count on successfully accomplishing under normal circumstances.
YMMV so its all a matter of personal flavor.
The rest of your answers I like, though.
Thanks.
Huh. After reading this thread, now I really wonder why the heck that Bard "lore master" ability exists...I always though it was so that the bard can ID monster easily in combat
Yeah, that does seem like it's (only?) use.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let your players Take 10 unless they're in combat or they're distracted by something other than the task at hand.That's pretty cut and dry.
I'll see your Sean K Reynolds post and raise you a Sean K Reynolds FAQ.
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.
So apparently the "task at hand" can be distracting...
:-/
|
|
Huh. After reading this thread, now I really wonder why the heck that Bard "lore master" ability exists...
Well, you have this:
"In addition, once per day, the bard can take 20 on any Knowledge skill check as a standard action. "
I also always viewed it like the rogues skill mastery, where it would allow a T10 even if distracted.
yep, it looks like YMMV.
which is why I want a way to tell how this rule works before I create a plan around it.
My two cents:
It's relatively easy to get a GM to agree that taking 10 doesn't take 10 times as long.
But it's just about impossible to get a GM to let you take 10 if he doesn't want you to. He can always fall back on the logic of "the possibility of failing the skill check is distracting, notwithstanding any examples using the Climb skill in the PHB".
Even the rules get confused on how it works, like the bardic knowledge ability mentioned above or the feat Childlike from the APG (you can take 10 on Bluff, sometimes! yay!).
Let your players Take 10 unless they're in combat or they're distracted by something other than the task at hand.That's pretty cut and dry.I'll see your Sean K Reynolds post and raise you a Sean K Reynolds FAQ.
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.So apparently the "task at hand" can be distracting...
:-/
I think this is a design boo-boo more than anything else. If you allow taking 10, the check is pretty much worthless. Since the cast time is so long and most likely out of combat, only in particular situations will you not be able to take 10. So most GMs *should not* allow taking 10 -- even if the rules are murky as to whether it's actually allowed or not.
Maybe you could argue, as part of the check, that you're at the whim of an angry deity and thus in combat. . . .
|
Let your players Take 10 unless they're in combat or they're distracted by something other than the task at hand.That's pretty cut and dry.I'll see your Sean K Reynolds post and raise you a Sean K Reynolds FAQ.
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.So apparently the "task at hand" can be distracting...
:-/
Seriously? We went through this exact posting several times during the last take-10 thread:
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
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)
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 reason you can't take 10 in this case isn't because of the distraction issue, it's because of the other part of the take 10 rule - you're under attack, which is like combat.
Let your players Take 10 unless they're in combat or they're distracted by something other than the task at hand.That's pretty cut and dry.I'll see your Sean K Reynolds post and raise you a Sean K Reynolds FAQ.
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.So apparently the "task at hand" can be distracting...
:-/
Seriously? We went through this exact posting several times during the last take-10 thread:
[..]
The reason you can't take 10 in this case isn't because of the distraction issue, it's because of the other part of the take 10 rule - you're under attack, which is like combat.
You're missing the point. I'm trying to say that you can't take one quote from one message board post in isolation and point to it saying "Ah ha! This clears things up!" Because ultimately the line between "as immediately dangerous as combat" and "not as immediately dangerous as combat" is up to the individual GM.
(P.S. As I noted in another thread, I agree that you clearly can't take 10 on Contact Other Plane because it has duration: Concentration; concentrating on a spell is clearly distracting in my book.)
Hm. I've never been a fan of taking 10 or 20, mainly because as mentioned above, the DM has too much say as to whether or not it can happen. I understand the importance of keeping the game moving along, but after a few bad experiences, I'd rather encourage my players to roll the dice than anything else.
Huh. After reading this thread, now I really wonder why the heck that Bard "lore master" ability exists...
Here's a way it could work:
Scenario A:
GM: The people of the village tell you that their leader was devoured by a hydra. Make a knowledge: arcana check.
Wizard: Can I take 10?
GM: Sure.
Scenario B:
GM: Suddenly, a snake monster with multiple heads leaps out of the bushes. Make a knowledge: arcana check.
Wizard: Can I take 10?
GM: No. You're distracted by an immediate threat. Make the roll. Maybe you'll suddenly remember lots about it, or maybe the terror will drive all useful information from your mind.
Bard: I use my lore-master ability and take 10.
GM: Sure.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Scenario B:
GM: Suddenly, a snake monster with multiple heads leaps out of the bushes. Make a knowledge: arcana check.
Wizard: Can I take 10?
GM: No. You're distracted by an immediate threat. Make the roll. Maybe you'll suddenly remember lots about it, or maybe the terror will drive all useful information from your mind.
Bard: I use my lore-master ability and take 10.
GM: Sure.
It suddenly occurs to me that the fat kid from How to Train Your Dragon must've been a bard with the lore master ability, then.
Anyway, back on topic. I think we can all agree that there are gry areas as to what constitutes sufficient threat/distraction to prevent the use of Take 10. However, as I reflect back on my own experience, those gray areas have hardly ever happened. Usually, I'm either in a situation of obvious duress (combat, chasing a werewolf across a city, riding a ship through a massive storm, etc) or not (looting the bodies, climbing up onto a ledge while exploring, checking the door for traps while everyone's standing around waiting casually).
So really, if people get educated on the more obvious parts of Take 10, there really shouldn't be that many issues.
Huh. After reading this thread, now I really wonder why the heck that Bard "lore master" ability exists...Here's a way it could work:
Scenario A:
GM: The people of the village tell you that their leader was devoured by a hydra. Make a knowledge: arcana check.
Wizard: Can I take 10?
GM: Sure.Scenario B:
GM: Suddenly, a snake monster with multiple heads leaps out of the bushes. Make a knowledge: arcana check.
Wizard: Can I take 10?
GM: No. You're distracted by an immediate threat. Make the roll. Maybe you'll suddenly remember lots about it, or maybe the terror will drive all useful information from your mind.
Bard: I use my lore-master ability and take 10.
GM: Sure.
Yes...although note that the rogue ability "Skill Mastery" uses wording like "she may take 10 even if stress and distractions would normally prevent her from doing so". So it's not clear if leaving that boilerplate wording out is meaningful or not.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Looks like many (not sure if it is a majority) of the posters are saying the best way to solve this problem is to just not T10.
Is that what I am hearing?
No, it's that if your GM says "no" when you try to take 10, just say "okay" and roll it, and don't reply to other players who try to weigh in on the subject. Then if the GM said "no" for something that should obviously have been legal (not a gray area), discuss it after the game.
Looks like many (not sure if it is a majority) of the posters are saying the best way to solve this problem is to just not T10.
Is that what I am hearing?
Not really. I'm saying it's worth a shot, but it's basically futile to argue if the GM plays the "too distracting" card.
Me: I take 10 on my Disable Device check.
GM: You can't, it's too dangerous.
Me: <shrug> Okay.
(EDIT: Ninja'd practically word-for-word by Jiggy.)
do I try it again at a later time with the same skill?
with a different skill?
I'm not sure what you're getting at. You can ask to take 10 as often as you like, in any situation you like. The worst that can happen is that the GM will say "no".
I tell people that there are 2 schools or types of RPG,
A) Confrontational - it's Judge vs. players (or often player vs. everyone else).
B) Conspiratorial - we're all in this together.Type A judges find reasons why something wont work,
Type B judges enjoy watching you find ways to get things to work.
You also have DMs that are conspiratorial but realize that some players are confrontational. As a DM I want to strike a fine line between someone using and someone exploiting the rules.
"I want you to succeed" and "I want you to succeed automatically" aren't the same thing. If someone tells me they have a +18 perception for traps i'll say "Great... you'll need it."
It goes against the spirit of adventure to make detecting traps automatic. It goes against the spirit of fairness to make the traps so hard that a maxed out perception monkey will miss them on a 10.
In the normal venue where I play, I try to teach the other judges and players what the T10 rules are (and re-teach it after they play for someone else). it's just that I travel to Cons regularly and alway hit this problem. In my last 12 tables the only judge who understood the T10 rules was my son.
This may be part of the problem. If you're pointing out that the take 10 rules don't take 10x as long as normal you're teaching. Anything beyond that is "u r doin it wrong" because the wording is vague and subject to interpretation. In other words you're trying to substitute your judgement for the DM's from the wrong side of the table.
There doesn't seem to be any consensus on when you can or can't take 10 , even within the rules system itself. Many abilities treat taking 10 under stress, even if the only stress is using that skill, as a special ability.
1) Skill mastery is a major rogue talent. Why would a major rogue talent exist to get you over minor obstacles?
2) Lore master
3) Childlike
Your resemblance to a human child tends to make others trust you, perhaps more than they should.
Prerequisites: Cha 13, halfling.
Benefit: You can take 10 on Bluff checks to convince others you are telling the truth, so long as your story makes you appear innocent. You gain a +2 bonus on Disguise skill checks to pose as a human child, and ignore the check penalties for disguising yourself as a different race and age category while doing so.
Now, a +2 bonus on a specific bluff highly underpowered for a feat, so the draw has to be the take 10. But whats the point of this feat if you can take 10 anyway? You're highly unlikely to be using this in combat, or when distracted by anything other than making the bluff check to point out the window
Magic Lore (Ex): At 2nd level, an archivist gains a bonus on Spellcraft checks to identify magic items or decipher scrolls equal to half his bard level and may take 10 on such checks. An archivist can use Disable Device to disarm magical traps as per a rogue's trapfinding ability and gains a +4 bonus on saves against magical traps, language-dependent effects, and symbols, glyphs, and magical writings of any kind. This ability replaces well-versed.
-how often do you ID magic items or decipher scrolls in combat?
Effortless Sneak (Sp) Effortless Sneak (Sp): At 3rd level, the chameleon chooses a single terrain from the ranger's favored terrain class feature. While she is within that terrain, she can take 10 on any Stealth check she can make within that terrain. When the chameleon reaches 6th level, and every three levels thereafter, she chooses a new type of terrain from the ranger's favored terrain list
The applicability of stealth in combat is fairly limited. You would use stealth to sneak up on someone, but allegedly you can already take 10 to sneak passed the dragon.
Pass For Human: also allows you to take 10 on disguise rolls
actually the worst that can happen is the Judge can get pissed at me constantly breaking his concentration and all the monsters would then consider my Rogue a new snake food they just got to try (Elf, the other white meat).
Not to put too fine a point on it, but I suspect the GMs are not getting pissed at you for politely asking if you can take 10 and abiding by their rulings; it sounds like you're engaging them in debate in the middle of the game.
That's why I used Take 10 on my Linguistics check for this thread. I figured I could get the gist of it without necessarily reading every single post :)
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I'm kind of thinking of making a pamphlet with the T10 rules, the SKR posts referenced earlier, and some brief discussion on the theoretical and practical application of T10. Then I can print a bazillion copies and hand them out to every single player and GM I run into locally. If I don't end up with enough text for a proper pamphlet, I could always throw T20 in there too.
I just need to get around to buying ink for my printer...
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Send it to me! I'm already about to drop a chunk on T-shirts and will print them myself. (nosig (at) aol (dot) com)I'm kind of thinking of making a pamphlet with the T10 rules, the SKR posts referenced earlier, and some brief discussion on the theoretical and practical application of T10. Then I can print a bazillion copies and hand them out to every single player and GM I run into locally. If I don't end up with enough text for a proper pamphlet, I could always throw T20 in there too.
I just need to get around to buying ink for my printer...
Haha, I haven't actually *made* the pamphlets yet; it's just an idea. But yeah, I can send it to you once I make it.
As for the T-shirts, are you planning on just the rules text? That's probably the best way to go. Although I would recommend some slight emphasis:
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.
The part that I bolded above, I recommend putting in a different color font on the shirts. Like if you're doing a white shirt with black text, maybe make those bits red or green. I say this because I think most misunderstandings of T10 are at least related to a failure to realize that the entire point of the mechanic is to prevent failure.
Just a suggestion.
If you see someone in a T10 T-shirt at a con sometime, stop and say hi!
I suspect you'll get a lot of fingerprints from GMs pointing at the words "immediate danger", so you better use a high-quality ink for them. ;-)
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Got two T-shirts on order now (one for me, one for my wife), should be in in a week. Not bad, like $15 bucks a piece. But I just had the T10 rules on the front, I figure if it comes up, I'll pass over the SKR links on a printed sheet - this will segway into a T10/T20 write up page.sounds good!
If you see someone in a T10 T-shirt at a con sometime, stop and say hi!
Seriously? Where'd you get custom shirts for $15?