Retrying skill checks.

[Teldil]

As a new GM, I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around retrying some skill checks.

The official rules say you can retry a perception check and disable device checks for as many times as you want. Do people actually allow this?

This makes no sense to me.

For example, lets say a character is trying to hear noise from inside a room behind a closed door. The DC to hear this noise is 20. The character tries it, and rolls a 12. If he keeps standing there rolling, he will eventually get a 20.
Let's assume the noise level remains EXACTLY the same inside that room for the entire duration.

Why should he be able to retry it over and over, if his character WAS NOT able to hear this the first time?

Another example is traps. Assuming the PC CAN reach the target DC with a good roll, why should he be able to keep rerolling until he gets it?
Not detecting the trap the first time, as I see it, should mean his character CANNOT detect it and therefore not allow him any more tries.

If the trap's DC is reachable for him, whats the point of even rolling at all. He can just roll until he gets a 20, and that way, either discover the trap or verify for certain there is no trap he can identify.

Why would a player not sit there rolling for hours until he can get the highest possible roll ? Otherwise he can't be certain he didnt miss something.

Any new light on this would be appreciated :) Thanks!

[Nefreet]

Well, regarding Disable Device, if they fail by 5 or more, they set off the trap.

Retrying Perception makes sense. Have you ever tried to listen to a conversation through a door before? Sometimes you can pick out a sentence here or there, and sometimes you can't. Think of all the movies you've watched where hilarity ensued after some character misheard a conversation through a wall.

[Zhayne]

This is what take 10 and take 20 are for.

[anthonydido]

Not every check is able to be retried though. Say you have to make a perception check in order to act in the surprise round. If you fail it there is no retrying it since combat will likely ensue.

Basically just make a judgement call on whether it makes sense for them to retry the check. Some make sense and some don't.

Edit: ...and what Zhayne said ^^^

[chrono17]

As for missing the trap, how many times have you missed finding your car keys in plain sight but after checking three or four times suddenly you see them? It's like that. If they're willing to take the time, they can keep looking.

If it bothers you, find ways to penalize them for the time they're spending. Roll perception checks for enemies to notice them and set up an ambush or something.

[Nefreet]

Just be sure to inform (or have a discussion with) your players before you go about changing the rules. Enacting a penalty or restriction in the middle of a game will likely upset them, especially if they've built their character around a certain set of skills.

And really, Rogues don't need nerfing. Let them be good at the one thing they can do.

[Orfamay Quest]

Teldil wrote:

As a new GM, I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around retrying some skill checks.

The official rules say you can retry a perception check and disable device checks for as many times as you want. Do people actually allow this?

This makes no sense to me.

For example, lets say a character is trying to hear noise from inside a room behind a closed door. The DC to hear this noise is 20. The character tries it, and rolls a 12. If he keeps standing there rolling, he will eventually get a 20.

Yeah, that's basically the take 20 mechanic.

Quote:

Let's assume the noise level remains EXACTLY the same inside that room for the entire duration.

That's actually a rather silly assumption; even if the sound level in the room is some sort of a constant signal, your breathing and heartbeat are not, and part of retrying is trying to make yourself quieter. Furthermore, a lot of perception is (psychologically) figuring out what to expect, so if you get a hunch about what it might be, you can confirm that by listening to new cues.

But in a more realistic situation, the sound level in the room will also be changing -- the sibilant /s/, for example, is much more likely to be overheard (and understood) than the stop consonant /b/. So if what you're listening to is language, the sound will be substantially different from time to time.

Quote:

Another example is traps. Assuming the PC CAN reach the target DC with a good roll, why should he be able to keep rerolling until he gets it?

Because he keeps looking. Think about a Where's Wally picture and how long it takes you to pay attention to the necessary meaningful details.

Quote:

If the trap's DC is reachable for him, whats the point of even rolling at all. He can just roll until he gets a 20, and that way, either discover the trap or verify for certain there is no trap he can identify.

Time. Taking 20 (or rerolling for a 20) will typically take minutes instead of seconds. If there's an ogre sniffing your trail, you might not want to wait around. Similarly, if there's someone in the room, you might not want to give them another five rounds to cast buff spells before you charge in.

Think, if you like, of Gandalf (and Merry) at the Gates of Moria. Taking 20 to solve a riddle is quite reasonable (and everyone accepted it) until tentacles started to come out of the lake and try to eat the Ring-bearer.

[Jiggy]

Teldil wrote:

The official rules say you can retry a perception check and disable device checks for as many times as you want. Do people actually allow this?

Absolutely.

Quote:

For example, lets say a character is trying to hear noise from inside a room behind a closed door. The DC to hear this noise is 20. The character tries it, and rolls a 12. If he keeps standing there rolling, he will eventually get a 20.

Let's assume the noise level remains EXACTLY the same inside that room for the entire duration.

Why should he be able to retry it over and over, if his character WAS NOT able to hear this the first time?

This very morning I heard a faint beeping coming from somewhere outside. Couldn't figure out what it was. I listened for a while, then didn't hear it anymore. I shrugged and went on with my morning. Then like a minute later, I noticed the beeping again.

Did it stop and restart? Did I lose track of it because it was so faint? I don't honestly know.

Perception: working as intended.

Quote:

Another example is traps. Assuming the PC CAN reach the target DC with a good roll, why should he be able to keep rerolling until he gets it?

Not detecting the trap the first time, as I see it, should mean his character CANNOT detect it and therefore not allow him any more tries.

What an unsuccessful search means is that he DID NOT detect it, not that he CANNOT detect it. Not only is it totally legit for someone to retry a Perception check to search for traps, but the rules actually call this out as a common use of the Take 20 mechanic, which is just basically just fast-forwarding through 20 checks and assuming he eventually "rolls" a 20.

Again, working as intended.

Quote:

If the trap's DC is reachable for him, whats the point of even rolling at all.

None, if he's got the time available. See also Take 20, as mentioned. But if he's in a hurry (impatient caster with buffs ticking down?) then maybe he just wants to make a couple of quick rolls and hope for the best.

People do better when they can take their time. Working as intended.

Quote:

He can just roll until he gets a 20, and that way, either discover the trap or verify for certain there is no trap he can identify.

Yep! :)

Quote:

Why would a player not sit there rolling for hours until he can get the highest possible roll ? Otherwise he can't be certain he didnt miss something.

Any new light on this would be appreciated :) Thanks!

Sounds like you understand the rules, and just disagree that they produce a good gaming experience. I recommend giving them an honest go for a whole campaign and seeing how they do. :)

[taldanrebel2187]

Zhayne wrote:

This is what take 10 and take 20 are for.

In my experience, a lot of DMs even run this wrong. You can't take 20 if failure has a consequence (i.e. Disable Device, where you may break the lock or set off the trap). I've seen some DMs even allow taking a 10 on Crafting, which RAW is also not allowed due to the potential to waste the materials.

As a totalitarian DM, I do not allow players to take a 10 when there is a consequence for failure that I deem significant, such as in Crafting. For example failure on a Disable Device may spring the trap. Failure on crafting may waste the supplies. Failure on perception might just trigger a time-lapse trap. Seems some players are used to DMs that don't know any better in Society that let them take 20 on everything, usually as a factor of laziness.

[Jiggy]

taldanrebel2187 wrote:

Zhayne wrote:

This is what take 10 and take 20 are for.

In my experience, a lot of DMs even run this wrong. You can't take 20 if failure has a consequence (i.e. Disable Device, where you may break the lock or set off the trap). I've seen some DMs even allow taking a 10 on Crafting, which RAW is also not allowed due to the potential to waste the materials.

As a totalitarian DM, I do not allow players to take a 10 when there is a consequence for failure that I deem significant, such as in Crafting. For example failure on a Disable Device may spring the trap. Failure on crafting may waste the supplies. Failure on perception might just trigger a time-lapse trap. Seems some players are used to DMs that don't know any better in Society that let them take 20 on everything, usually as a factor of laziness.

Bit of irony in the bolded part...

You're correct that you can't T20 if there's a consequence for failure.

You're incorrect that this includes breaking the lock you were trying to pick—the core rulebook even lists picking a lock with Disable Device as being a common use of T20.

You're correct that failure would spring the trap, however, precluding T20 for that use of Disable Device.

You're incorrect that the consequences of failure in crafting would prevent T10, because T10 is not T20; T10 is to be used because you want to avoid the consequences of failure. Failure's consequences do not preclude the use of T10.

Also, nice of you to accuse people of laziness for running a mechanic differently when you've got it so jumbled yourself.

[taldanrebel2187]

Oh I meant in my home games, I don't allow taking a 10 if there's a significant penalty for failure.I guess RAW you're right. I'm not sure I like the idea of people being able to take a 10 for crafting. Shouldn't that increase the total time that it takes to make an item?

I mean taken to a ridiculous extreme, couldn't you take 10 with diplomacy or intimidate to just essentially always get what you want from NPCs? I think taking a 10 on something that has a potential for failure should be treated seriously. Definitely in my games, there are times where I would absolutely not allow it. Or just tell the person, OK it takes you longer to craft the item or something, since you're being cautious.

My big issue with Society games, is that a lot of DMs just hand-waive things and let players take 10 on perception checks or other things that they really should not do. For instance, when you are distracted or have a threat of danger (usually what Perception rolls are for), you should not even get a re-roll let alone the option of a take 10. That may just say more about some of the DMs I used to encounter years ago, however.

[Nefreet]

taldanrebel2187 wrote:

Oh I meant in my home games, I don't allow taking a 10 if there's a significant penalty for failure.

Isn't that when you want to take 10?

taldanrebel2187 wrote:

I guess RAW you're right. I'm not sure I like the idea of people being able to take a 10 for crafting. Shouldn't that increase the total time that it takes to make an item?

Taking 10 does not increase the time like taking 20 does.

taldanrebel2187 wrote:

I mean taken to a ridiculous extreme, couldn't you take 10 with diplomacy or intimidate to just essentially always get what you want from NPCs?

You can't take 10 when in combat, so most uses of Intimidate wouldn't be applicable, but taking 10 on Diplomacy at a social party? Sure. Isn't that what most people do in real life?

taldanrebel2187 wrote:

I think taking a 10 on something that has a potential for failure should be treated seriously.

"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"

taldanrebel2187 wrote:

My big issue with Society games, is that a lot of DMs just hand-waive things and let players take 10 on perception checks

You can take 10 on Perception. You can even take 20 on perception to look for traps.

taldanrebel2187 wrote:

For instance, when you are distracted or have a threat of danger (usually what Perception rolls are for), you should not even get a re-roll let alone the option of a take 10.

Agreed. You are running the take 10 mechanic correctly in that one case.

[taldanrebel2187]

In Society yeah you can take a 20 on perception to look for traps, but you have to specifically say that you are doing so and say you are taking a 20. I really don't like this rule and in my games, I do not run with it. It really trivializes traps when one character can always just "take a 20" and auto-find every trap.

I think even if you notice the trap, it doesn't mean you know what it does. I think for instance a Soultrapping Gem, if you take a 20 you don't tell the player "Ah ha, you found a Soultrapping Gem trap". I think it's sufficient to say "you notice a blue gem on the ceiling". Noticing the trap and realizing that *it is a trap* are IMNSHO, two entirely different things. Plus you gotta beat the DC by 5 or more to know how the trap works, therefore while attempting to disarm it or go around it, you may actually set it off.

My two copper.

Per rules:

"Success generally indicates that the creature has detected the MECHANISM that activates the trap, such as a pressure plate, odd gears attached to a door handle, and the like. Beating this check by 5 or more also gives some indication of what the trap is designed to do."

Detecting the mechanism is not always as useful as you may think is all I am trying to say.

"When your character is not in immediate danger or distracted"

Distracted is a vague term, a DM may say that you're distracted if you are delivering a speech, bluffing or diplomancing. Carrying a conversation requires effort, and because of that you could easily say a character engaged in a political discourse is distracted, and therefore cannot take 10. Then again maybe this is why I get called D20 Hitler...

EDIT:

Upon a second reading, "threat" is also a vague term. It says "such as combat" not "only combat". A DM may have a case of arguing that an angry mob is a "threat" or that a crowded bar is a "distraction" or that having drank the king's fine mead is also a distraction. The reason I wouldn't allow a 20 for finding magical traps, despite what the SRD says, is that I think looking for traps in a dungeon is inherently dangerous and distracting.

[Zhayne]

'Maybe'?

[taldanrebel2187]

That doesn't sound like a counter-argument :P

[Nefreet]

taldanrebel2187 wrote:

I think even if you notice the trap, it doesn't mean you know what it does. I think for instance a Soultrapping Gem, if you take a 20 you don't tell the player "Ah ha, you found a Soultrapping Gem trap". I think it's sufficient to say "you notice a blue gem on the ceiling". Noticing the trap and realizing that *it is a trap* are IMNSHO, two entirely different things. Plus you gotta beat the DC by 5 or more to know how the trap works, therefore while attempting to disarm it or go around it, you may actually set it off.

This is off-topic, and is a discussion that has been hashed out at length many times before, but I feel I must address it.

Making the game difficult for Rogues:

My first character in PFS was a Rogue, and he's 15th level now. It really rubs me the wrong way when I sit down with GMs who run traps like you do, because what you're doing is entirely unfair to one of the weakest classes in the game.

Let Rogues be good at the one thing they're good at, and don't create your own obstacles for them.

Rules: Traps have a Perception DC and a Disable Device DC. Succeeding at both of those gets you your experience.

Some traps may have additional circumstances to overcome that are written into the trap, such as a pit requiring a way across, or magma that is still hot, or something, but you don't get to create your own hurdles in addition to those printed.

Not Rules: Noticing the blue gem vs. Realizing the blue gem is a trap.

Rogues don't have Spellcraft, or Detect Magic. They don't even have Knowledge (engineering). How do you suppose the Rogue disables anything?

Oh, hey, look, there's this skill called Disable Device! Wow. Okay, and a Rogue has the additional ability to disarm magical traps? Cool. Everyone should have a Rogue in their party.

What's that? The GM hates Rogues? And loves traps? Why would I want to play in their game?

Picking on the Rogue is like picking out the weakest, smallest, and poorest kid on the playground and going to lengths to plan out stealing their lunch money. It's not going to win you any friends in life, and the rewards are minimal at best.

[JoeJ]

To keep taking 20 on Perception checks from being a problem, go old school and design your dungeons with a Wandering Encounter table. Every 10 minutes or so there's a 1 in 6 chance that something discovers the PCs. (After all, if creatures are living there, wouldn't they occasionally move to another room?) The PCs probably will - and should - continue to take 20 on Perceptions checks sometimes, but it will only happen when they think that not missing something is more important than the chance of being found and attacked.

Also, it's important to be clear on the difference between taking 10 and taking 20. You can take 10 whenever you're not distracted or in immediate danger. You can take 20 anytime failing the task doesn't prevent you from immediately trying again.

For example, if a PC is offered 50gp to walk a plank set on two boxes 1' off the floor, they can take 10 because there's no danger. They can't take 20, however, because the first time they fail they fall off and the test is over. If that same PC was trying kick open a door while being shot at by archers they can't take 10 - they're in immediate danger. They could take 20, though, if they're willing to stick around that long.

[taldanrebel2187]

What follows is my OT reply. I mostly agree Rogues get a raw deal. I'd go for the middle ground, and not reveal the gem's magical nature but let the PC know that it's definitely part of what is "probably a trap" or "dangerous looking".

What follows is an example taken to absurdity of how a level 1 could notice almost every trap in Society play...

OT Remarks on perception and Take 20 in Society play:

Half-Elf Ranger, level 1

Let's say he goes 16 WIS. Then he takes Skill Focus (Perception). Let's say this Half-Elf ranger used to take out the trash, so he has the Garbage Picker trait.

He'll have 1 rank + 3 training bonus + 3 WIS + 3 trait bonus + 3 skill focus + 2 half-elf racial. That's a 15 Perception at level one.

This puts a level 1 *always* noticing a CR 15 or CR 16 trap, due to being able to Take 20 with absolutely no consequence to doing so.

My 2 copper is that Take 20 needs to have some sort of consequence related to traps, whether it's a possibility of setting it off, wandering monsters or just story-line consequences. Otherwise players will abuse the hell out of it.

Sorta why Society play irritates me sometimes... At least 3 years ago it was absurdly easy to get around any trap.

[Nefreet]

Another off-topic reply:

That's mostly good to hear. But we still run traps differently. When I run a scenario, and a Rogue beats the Perception DC to notice a trap, I describe it differently (and still within the rules, as I understand them):

"You've spotted a trap! Peering closer, you realize this resembles something you've only read about in books before. It's a 'Soul Trap', powered by a soul-trapping gem."

If the Rogue beats the Perception DC, I give them the name of the trap that is in print. I believe that is supported by the rules. I'll also tell them any special conditions required to Disable it, as printed within the trap, if there are any. It's punishing success to do anything else.

If the party wants to know more about the effects of the gem itself, I'll call for relevant knowledge checks or Spellcraft, but spotting the trap, knowing what it is, and disarming it shouldn't be any more difficult than they already are.

EDIT: wait, you changed your post =(. I mostly agreed with the one you had earlier.

My 2nd spoilered post in the same comment:

And I doubt that Half-elf has many social skills if he's dedicating so much effort to finding traps, and probably doesn't excel at combat, either. Those three areas require a lot of specialization. If someone goes all out and creates their character to excel at something, I feel it's insulting and aggravating to take that one thing away from them.

Regarding take 20 on Perception, remember that it takes 20x the amount of time to perform. If your Rogue is doing that every 10 feet in a dungeon, the casters in the party are going to slap him. And you can't take 20 with the Trap Spotter Rogue Talent, either. There are consequences to taking 20. Just not when it comes to the actual trap-finding bit.

[FLite]

Also, knowing the trap is there, and being able to get past it are two *very* different skills...

[Jiggy]

Taldanrebel, it's fine if you don't like the gameplay experience that results from the skill rules and choose to do differently in your games. It's less fine to say that others "should" be doing it that way or that those who don't are "lazy".

[blahpers]

So it sounds like everyone understands (or is on the path to understanding) how take 10 and take 20 work, but a few don't like the mechanic. If that's the case, get rid of it, but it'd a pretty big departure from the core rules so I'd suggest letting your players know of this before it comes up. Also, expect a lot of needless dice rolling, especially when carefully making one's way through a dungeon.

[RDM42]

Teldil wrote:

As a new GM, I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around retrying some skill checks.

The official rules say you can retry a perception check and disable device checks for as many times as you want. Do people actually allow this?

This makes no sense to me.

For example, lets say a character is trying to hear noise from inside a room behind a closed door. The DC to hear this noise is 20. The character tries it, and rolls a 12. If he keeps standing there rolling, he will eventually get a 20.
Let's assume the noise level remains EXACTLY the same inside that room for the entire duration.

Why should he be able to retry it over and over, if his character WAS NOT able to hear this the first time?

He gradually is figuring out how to tune out distractions, picking out and discarding sounds from within the room to get at what he's trying to get at.

"Ok, that humming is coming from over there, the slight whistling is the wind over that window ... Etc. so what is left must be what's in that other room."

[Kwauss]

Remember if you take 20 to listen at the door, they get to take 20 on listening for you.

[JoeJ]

I don't use taking 10 in dungeons very much, at least not for PCs. I won't allow it if the PC knows (or believes) that they're in immediate danger - such as trying to disable a potentially deadly trap. I will often have guards take 10 on Perception. PCs can do that too, but the player has to tell me they're doing it.

There are some situations where the character wouldn't know that they're even making a check; for example, to detect an invisible spy in the room. In that case I'll either make the roll myself, behind my GM screen, or tell the player to roll a d20 without explaining why. Also, once in a while I'll roll dice, or tell a player to roll dice, when it means nothing, just to make metagaming harder.

[Hiklin Kemaal]

Do not reveal the DCs to the players in such scenarios, but offer them unlimited retries.

[N N 959]

JoeJ wrote:

I don't use taking 10 in dungeons very much, at least not for PCs. I won't allow it if the PC knows (or believes) that they're in immediate danger - such as trying to disable a potentially deadly trap.

You're not in immediate danger when disabling a trap. You're in potential danger.

You're in immediate danger if an axe is swinging towards your head. You're in immediate danger if a boulder is rolling toward you.

Potential danger doesn't disqualify Take 10. If it did, you couldn't take on any hardly anything. If I roll a 1, I could potentially make someone indifferent, hostile and they could attack me. As a GM, you're goal is not to make the game absurd or ridiculous.

Take 10 is there for a reason.

[Jeraa]

I think you two should have retried your Perception check. This thread died over 3 years ago.

[N N 959]

Even though this is an old thread, I'm going to respond to help educate others who dislike T10 and T20.

taldanrebel2187 wrote:

Oh I meant in my home games, I don't allow taking a 10 if there's a significant penalty for failure.I guess RAW you're right. I'm not sure I like the idea of people being able to take a 10 for crafting. Shouldn't that increase the total time that it takes to make an item?

I mean taken to a ridiculous extreme, couldn't you take 10 with diplomacy or intimidate to just essentially always get what you want from NPCs? I think taking a 10 on something that has a potential for failure should be treated seriously. Definitely in my games, there are times where I would absolutely not allow it. Or just tell the person, OK it takes you longer to craft the item or something, since you're being cautious.

My big issue with Society games, is that a lot of DMs just hand-waive things and let players take 10 on perception checks or other things that they really should not do. For instance, when you are distracted or have a threat of danger (usually what Perception rolls are for), you should not even get a re-roll let alone the option of a take 10. That may just say more about some of the DMs I used to encounter years ago, however.

Without exception, everyone I've read or talk to that refuses to implement T10/20 as written, does so from a lack of understanding. Invariably the argument is the same same as yours and Take 10/20 are construed as "I win" buttons. One time I had a PFS GM berate the table for using Take 20 and ask, "Why would you Take 20 in a dice game?"

I had to laugh at that. Why? Because it underscored his ignorance on why these mechanics exist.

T10/20 are crucial mechanics for the skills system. Without these mechanics, the skill system would be totally broken. T10 not only represents a real world mechanic, it is a tremendous and poorly understood tool for GMs, more so in home brew than PFS. As others in this thread have touched on, T10 represents skill copmetence that a laborer or professional person will apply to any routine task. Hammering nails, reading a patient chart, driving a truck, are all routine tasks that people essentially Take 10 on. When you refuse to allow Take 10, your'e essentially telling players that PCs can't be competent at anything, no matter how skilled they are.

The most misunderstood part of Take 10 is how it helps GMs, particularly in home brew. The benefit of T10 is that it allows the GM to create situations where you either reward a player for creating their PC with the attention to skills, or, you create situations where a skilled PC has purpose. For example, a player invests in giving her half-orc Linguistics. You create a situation where someone needs to forge a document and set the DC low enough for the half-orc to Take 10 and succeed. Guess what just happened? That player has been rewarded for investing in skills. You've suddenly allowed that player to feel like their character is useful and helpful to the success of the party. If you force the player to roll the die and they fail, then the player gets no sense of accomplishment. What's worse they may feel the skill system is stupid because it's completely random outcomes.

So what's the GM 101 lesson here? By sprinkling in various tasks that require a skill check, but are accomplished by T10, you allow players to succeed and be rewarded for build choices. And this use of Take 10 is far more useful to home brew than PFS, though it you can use it with PFS as well in a limited fashion.

The other completely overlooked aspect of Take 10 is hinted to us by the PDT's non-answer months ago. By allowing many tasks to be accomplished with T10. When PCs have to perform that same task under duress and a player has to roll the die, the Take 10 mechanic has contributed to the player feeling the stress/tension of the situation. If you hardly ever allow players to Take 10, then they aren't going to feel that immediate danger or distraction is any different than what happens normally. Think about it.

Take 20 is an entirely different animal. Take 20 exist solely for OOC reasons . If a PC is in a situation where the player can keep attempting the task, then you simply let them Take 20 instead of forcing them to keep rolling until they get a 20. That's it. It isn't some cheat or I win button, it's the game authors acknowledging that a player is going to keep rolling until that player sees a 20 on the die. So...simply give them the 20, advance the IC game clock 20 attempts in time, and save the real life people at the table the hassle of sitting around waiting while that player keeps rolling.

It should be abundantly clear that Take 20 came about because of how Perception works in PF. Since the rules allow and encourage PCs to search for things, you have to have a way to speed up the PC getting the best result that can be achieved.

[N N 959]

Jeraa wrote:

I think you two should have retried your Perception check. This thread died over 3 years ago.

The antipathy to T10 and T20 is alive and with ardent supporters. I'm hoping to dissuade others from adopting that attitude..

[blahpers]

Keep fighting the good fight, N N 959.

[wraithstrike]

blahpers wrote:

Keep fighting the good fight, <b>N N 959</b>.

You have to use "[]" not "<>" for the codes to work.

[blahpers]

wraithstrike wrote:

blahpers wrote:

Keep fighting the good fight, <b>N N 959</b>.

You have to use "[]" not "<>" for the codes to work.

-_______- I can't even plead ignorance on that one. Editing.