|
I would say that the players are welcome to take 10 while stealthing. However, a guard on patrol is NOT taking 10. Their whole job is to spot people and thus they are rolling a perception check every round like clockwork. Also note that the dogs have scent and thus will auto detect the presence but not the location of any stealthed character in range, unless they took the effort to remove scent.
|
That seems kind of pedantic, Andrew.
I have a simpler metric: is there an outside force interfering with my ability to devote my attention to a routine application of the skill check?
Am I maintaining a detect magic effect, keeping me from Taking 10 on an Identify roll?
Is there bad weather, where the unpredictable high winds are keeping me from Taking 10 on a Acrobatics check?
Are there ogre children throwing rocks down at me as I'm trying to climb out of a well?
--
That's clearly different -- at least, to me -- from Taking 10 on a Disable Device check to defuse a bomb.
+1.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
I admit. I didn't understand it at first either. But one of the designers at the time, specifically Sean K Reynolds, changed my mind with a post that is linked way above.It shows what the designers intent was. Which in something that was slightly ambiguous was very important to me in how I decided to interpret things from that point forward.
Almost everyone I have talked to agreed with the interpretation we have all been using.
Until this thread, I had never seen or even heard of this post from SKR. Even then, that thread doesn't really say that is what the rule means. It sounds more like he is saying "I do it this way because it seems to work better." Actually I'm fine with that. But if that was really what they wanted the rule to say, put it in the errata / faq / or multiple re-printings of the book.
Obviously a heck of a lot of us are going to continue reading it they way many of us already have.
A lot of these posts are sounding like we are obviously horrible, mean, vindictive GM's. There is apparently no reasonable way anyone could think take 10 isn't allowed for almost anything. Because obviously we all should magically know SKR suggests handling it like this.
... However, a guard on patrol is NOT taking 10. Their whole job is to spot people and thus they are rolling a perception check every round like clockwork. ...
Not disagreeing, but not sure where/how you get that. Almost everyone here seems to be saying that taking reasonable care at a task is 'taking 10' on that task.
... Also note that the dogs have scent and thus will auto detect the presence but not the location of any stealthed character in range, unless they took the effort to remove scent.
iirc, down wind on top of the wall/building.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since it came up in another thread, I will ask for opinions here. This happened way in the past so it has no immediate effect, I'm just curious.
Hypothetical approximation of the situation as I vaguely remember it.
The whole party has invested heavily in the stealth skill. They are trying to sneak into the castle. There are patrolling guards on the wall, in the tower, at the gate, and some dogs in the courtyard.If you say there is no danger because no one is fighting yet, so the guards take 10 on their perception and the party takes 10 on climb and stealth checks.
The party will absolutely never fail at almost any concentration of guards. Standard NPC and even guard dogs have a much lower perception modifier than the PC's have stealth modifier. They will always be able to sneak into anyplace no matter how heavily guarded. So some posters were saying things like Stealth Synergy or even a heavy focus on the Stealth skill is completely unnecessary. You just take 10 and succeed all the time.If you say there is danger because they could be discovered and shot at, so the guards roll perception and the party rolls stealth every round on their infiltration. Some dog/guard is going to roll a 19 when someone in the party rolls a 2.
Now the party will almost always fail the infiltration without something like Stealth Synergy or really astronomical stealth skills so they literally can't be detected even with a very low roll. {This is what our group went with and to be honest, I can't remember for sure if take 10 was ever even brought up as a possibility. I guarantee we would have said that was 'immediate danger.' It was nearly impossible to ever sneak into anyplace with significant guards no matter how good we were at it.}One seems too ridiculously easy the other seems too horrifically difficult. Yes, in real life teams of trained people can sneak past guards. It does happen. But it also isn't so stupidly easy that almost anyone can do it. How would you guys rule this?
You can take 20 on perception.
So, in order to sneak into and out a place undetected, the PC's take 10 needs to beat the guards' take 20.
Which seems appropriate.
|
|
... However, a guard on patrol is NOT taking 10. Their whole job is to spot people and thus they are rolling a perception check every round like clockwork. ...Not disagreeing, but not sure where/how you get that. Almost everyone here seems to be saying that taking reasonable care at a task is 'taking 10' on that task.
It's a GM call. For me, an off-duty guard walking across the wall would be taking 10 on perception. He is looking everywhere but not really paying too much attention to what he sees. He will see the obvious but not the hidden. An on-duty guard is actually putting more that the normal effort into it. It's their job. So that guard is rolling. Maybe he rolls a five one round and is looking off at a different spot. Next round they roll a 19 and are looking right at the sneaky rogue.
EDIT: To speed up play in this kind of situation, I pre-roll perception checks. That way as the players roll or take-10 at stealth I know exactly when they are spotted.
... Also note that the dogs have scent and thus will auto detect the presence but not the location of any stealthed character in range, unless they took the effort to remove scent.iirc, down wind on top of the wall/building.
Of course there will be situational modifiers. But as many a stealth thread has pointed out. It's really hard to sneak past a dog with stealth by raw.
|
To me, Take 10 means concentrating on what you are doing to make sure you give a certain minimum level of performance. So, to me, "Immediate danger" is simply a subset of "distracted." If the orc is about to charge you or the ceiling is about to cave in, it is nearly impossible to concentration sufficiently to Take 10 because the threat distracts you. Hence, you could Take 10 when jumping a pit as the pit is not going to jump out and attack you or otherwise distract you from concentrating in order to Take 10.
|
I'm going to mostly stay out of the take 10 conversation, because I made that mistake in the thread wraithstrike linked. Suffice to say I mostly came around to being able to use take 10 in a way consistent with the simple rules blackbloodtroll and others have mentioned.
But if you want your minds blown, toward the end of that thread, wraithstrike links to a thread about searching with perception where Mark Seifter says rules were left out, and using Perception as a move action was meant to only affect a limited area. He points to Pathfinder Unchained and a move action involving searching a 10x10 square to find things hidden from sight, like inside a drawer. He goes on to say he's looking into an FAQ to make those the standard rules (adding what was unintentionally left out of the core rulebook).
I'm still trying to wrap my head around the implications if that FAQ is issued. Hopefully they will address things like how you can take 20 to search a 10x10 area without triggering traps if you are opening drawers, moving things around, etc. Unchained describes it as you "thoroughly comb" an area. I know that isn't currently the way perception works, but it sounds like that's the way it was meant to work and.
...
You can take 20 on perception.So, in order to sneak into and out a place undetected, the PC's take 10 needs to beat the guards' take 20.
Which seems appropriate.
See this I would disagree with even more than all the other stuff I've read here.
Everyone says taking 20 is taking 20 times as long to cover all the possible rolls you could have made. So the PC's are sneaking by sometime during that 20 rounds. Was it during the round when they would have rolled the 2 or the round when they would have rolled the 17.
Plus the number of people that can operate at the absolute peak of performance during long periods of nothing happening is vanishingly small.
|
|
...
You can take 20 on perception.So, in order to sneak into and out a place undetected, the PC's take 10 needs to beat the guards' take 20.
Which seems appropriate.
See this I would disagree with even more than all the other stuff I've read here.
Everyone says taking 20 is taking 20 times as long to cover all the possible rolls you could have made. So the PC's are sneaking by sometime during that 20 rounds. Was it during the round when they would have rolled the 2 or the round when they would have rolled the 17.
Plus the number of people that can operate at the absolute peak of performance during long periods of nothing happening is vanishingly small.
In our human world the number of people that can do it is really small. in Pathfinder world, They could do it as long as they aren't sleeping so about 16 hours straight, and everyone is looking all directions at once, so you can't walk behind a guard because he is always looking your directions. Even having two people walk on either side of the guard at the same time, he's watching both of the all the time.
|
|
If the guards are on high alert for some reason, I'd actually have them doing both - Take 10 for reactive checks and using a move action to make a rolled Perception check every round. Your average guard isn't going to keep that up for long though.
The only thing stopping an average guard from doing it for 10+ hours is the GM. Everyone in the Pathfinder world doesn't get bored of anything.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the guards are on high alert for some reason, I'd actually have them doing both - Take 10 for reactive checks and using a move action to make a rolled Perception check every round. Your average guard isn't going to keep that up for long though.The only thing stopping an average guard from doing it for 10+ hours is the GM. Everyone in the Pathfinder world doesn't get bored of anything.
Also it takes a minute to do a perception check at take 20 so... you what? Close your eyes for 59 seconds and then open them and see oh my god its full of stars?
|
|
If the guards are on high alert for some reason, I'd actually have them doing both - Take 10 for reactive checks and using a move action to make a rolled Perception check every round. Your average guard isn't going to keep that up for long though.The only thing stopping an average guard from doing it for 10+ hours is the GM. Everyone in the Pathfinder world doesn't get bored of anything.True, but irrelevant.
That's part of the GM's job. Players should hold to the same reasonable limits.
p1 - It's time to settle down for the night
p2 - okay I'll keep watch for the night since I have the Keep Watch spellp2 for those 8 hours is on full alert, unless are you adding drowsy penalties to his perception? Perhaps distracted penalties? Bored penalties? I've only seen and heard of Gm's telling P2 to make a perception check for their watch time or when the check was needed.
So since you're saying they can't maintain focus for that long how would you handle the PC's keeping watch during the night?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I take it you guys haven't worked private security, lol.
As someone who has, I guarantee that if that guard on the wall is doing his job, he's taking 10. It is patently impossible for someone to be at "high alert" for an entire shift, let alone do so night after night.
Lets be honest, he's either taking one or the -10 penalty for being asleep.
|
|
I take it you guys haven't worked private security, lol.
As someone who has, I guarantee that if that guard on the wall is doing his job, he's taking 10. It is patently impossible for someone to be at "high alert" for an entire shift, let alone do so night after night.
I take it you having done guard duty in the Pathfinder world. In the Pathfinder world you can take move and standard actions, and both of those could be used to do perception checks. You're also looking all ways at once, which is patently impossible for someone in our world to do. So Pathfinder guards can look everyone at once all night at "high alert" night after night and be completely fine.
Why are "People" okay with the rule he's looking everywhere at once, but not the rule that he can be looking for hour straight?
|
|
Why couldn't he spend all his actions making perception checks? What's stopping him from doing so? Is he unable to take actions while keeping watch?Because people don't do that. That's not how we function. No one can remain on full alert for hours on end while nothing happens.
That said, there is no reason by strict RAW. I wouldn't allow it. I also wouldn't allow it for your enemies.
People don't cast burning hands, or cure light wounds. That's not how we function. No one can cast real magic.
Do you allow pathfinder character's to follow these rules? Or do you not allow casting either in your games?
|
|
Why couldn't he spend all his actions making perception checks? What's stopping him from doing so? Is he unable to take actions while keeping watch?Because people don't do that. That's not how we function. No one can remain on full alert for hours on end while nothing happens.
That said, there is no reason by strict RAW. I wouldn't allow it. I also wouldn't allow it for your enemies.
People don't cast burning hands, or cure light wounds. That's not how we function. No one can cast real magic.
Do you allow pathfinder character's to follow these rules? Or do you not allow casting either in your games?
Bogus argument. The fact that Pathfinder has fantasy elements in it does not mean you get ignore all aspects of reality. All fantasy worlds are based on reality or they would be completely incomprehensible to real people. There may be unreal elements, but the vast majority of the world still functions just like the real one.
PFS is kind of like M:tG. M:tG is a game that has a simple set of base rules and everything else is powers that break those rules. In RPGs, the base rules are reality. If nothing specifically breaks the rules of reality in an RPG then the default assumption is that you go by reality.
No one in the real world could take 20 on Perception for 8 hours straight. And nothing in the rules contradicts this as the rules mention nothing about how much time you can spend Taking 20. It is possible there may be spells or magic items that let you break this base rule of reality, but that doesn't change the base rule of reality.
|
|
Why couldn't he spend all his actions making perception checks? What's stopping him from doing so? Is he unable to take actions while keeping watch?Because people don't do that. That's not how we function. No one can remain on full alert for hours on end while nothing happens.
That said, there is no reason by strict RAW. I wouldn't allow it. I also wouldn't allow it for your enemies.
People don't cast burning hands, or cure light wounds. That's not how we function. No one can cast real magic.
Do you allow pathfinder character's to follow these rules? Or do you not allow casting either in your games?
Bogus argument. The fact that Pathfinder has fantasy elements in it does not mean you get ignore all aspects of reality. All fantasy worlds are based on reality or they would be completely incomprehensible to real people. There may be unreal elements, but the vast majority of the world still functions just like the real one.
PFS is kind of like M:tG. M:tG is a game that has a simple set of base rules and everything else is powers that break those rules. In RPGs, the base rules are reality. If nothing specifically breaks the rules of reality in an RPG then the default assumption is that you go by reality.
No one in the real world could take 20 on Perception for 8 hours straight. And nothing in the rules contradicts this as the rules mention nothing about how much time you can spend Taking 20. It is possible there may be spells or magic items that let you break this base rule of reality, but that doesn't change the base rule of reality.
The rules say I can make a perception check as a move action. The fact that people can be on high alert all the time and looking all directions is part of the "fantasy element" of pathfinder
|
|
I generally encourage take 10 and often even suggest the option to new players.
But there is one situation where I hate it as GM - players who build their characters with auto succeed in mind.
The worst I encountered was a full group that always played together and had a take 10 DC30+for each skill spread across the group. Unfortunately that let to one player no longer being used to face possible failure.
In a social encounter EACH character was able to contribute at the same time. That player broke out in tears as he/she (rightly) assumed her Take 10 would fall short (her build wasn't diplomacy/bluff/perform or one of the other possible options) and she couldn't face a situation where she had to roll (actually I think she needed 12+).
After two or three rolls of single digit we had tears at the table - despite the group overall still succeeding.
This wasn't fun for either side.
|
|
The rules say I can make a perception check as a move action.
Yes. But they do not say you can spend infinite move actions consecutively for the next 8 hours to make them. The rules are silent on this issue, hence the default to reality.
The fact that people can be on high alert all the time and looking all directions is part of the "fantasy element" of pathfinder
There is nothing in the rules that supports this conclusion as their is nothing in the rules that states that just because you can take a given action you can take that given action an indefinite number of times.
I wasn't really exposed to a frequent use of the take 10/take 20 mechanic until I started running pbp games on this forum. That said: I allow either when the story makes sense. I could sit here and quote rules or 'real life' reasons for why I do that, but it wouldn't make sense to some, and I'd be ridiculed for it.
Example: Guards do not get to take 20 on watch in my worlds, and neither do PCs. Why? Because it adds to the tension of the story. There are many times I do not even have something to see, I just want them to roll like there is. Like there might be. I don't need a rule to do that for me.
If you are checking for traps at my table, I am rolling the Perception check, unless you specifically ask to take 10/20. To be truthful, we don't actually use that mechanic as much as we should. Its not any evil plot other than my players like to roll, and they don't even understand the take 10/20 systems. We are getting there, but not quite yet.
I don't have a problem with take 10/20. If a player has invested enough skill points into being good at something, than they should be good at it, and better if they take extra time. It's unfortunate that some GMs feel the need to control things above and beyond what makes a good story.
The rules say I can make a perception check as a move action.Yes. But they do not say you can spend infinite move actions consecutively for the next 8 hours to make them. The rules are silent on this issue, hence the default to reality.
The fact that people can be on high alert all the time and looking all directions is part of the "fantasy element" of pathfinderThere is nothing in the rules that supports this conclusion as their is nothing in the rules that states that just because you can take a given action you can take that given action an indefinite number of times.
Unless the game limits you will a slot or pool or some other mechanism then "can" means "can all day long." If something takes a standard action then you can spend every waking 6 seconds of your day performing that action. Imposing a limit to that is definitely beyond game rules.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm guessing the group that says that you can do the same action all day long has never looked at the hustling rules then.
I generally have my NPCs taking 10 on all of their opposed-roll-potential checks. It saves me a little time and all the PCs need to do is equal or beat that DC to succeed.
As far as taking 20 on perception checks on watch, I don't see that as viable. In order to get those retries, they need a fundamentally static situation and that's now what you have when dealing with opposed checks. With the assumption of rolling fail-worthy results before you get your 20, that guardsman has already failed to spot the security risk before he scores a 20. So by the time the 20 rolls around, it's too late.
I generally encourage take 10 and often even suggest the option to new players.
But there is one situation where I hate it as GM - players who build their characters with auto succeed in mind.
The worst I encountered was a full group that always played together and had a take 10 DC30+for each skill spread across the group. Unfortunately that let to one player no longer being used to face possible failure.
In a social encounter EACH character was able to contribute at the same time. That player broke out in tears as he/she (rightly) assumed her Take 10 would fall short (her build wasn't diplomacy/bluff/perform or one of the other possible options) and she couldn't face a situation where she had to roll (actually I think she needed 12+).After two or three rolls of single digit we had tears at the table - despite the group overall still succeeding.
This wasn't fun for either side.
That is a player issue, especially if the tears were literal, the game was not being played by little kids.
|
|
There are a number of problems applying your anecdote. First, we don't know what the DC is and we don't know the modifiers involved, for any particular situation. Just because a few people fail doesn't mean that the person right after them can't Take 10.
Its a 5 foot wide gap ... so 5.
Second, you suggest and reasonable explanation which invalidates this as proof of anything.
I never said it was proof. Its not supposed to be proof. And it wasn't presented as proof, it was presented as a counter argument. It was specifically LABELED as such.
Quote:
The adrenaline kicks in and people do reaally [sic] stuipd things like second guesse [sic] themselves...
If spelling errors on the internet bother you correct it in the reply and move on.
As someone may have suggested above, I would equate this with the person deciding to roll the dice rather than trusting themselves. In sports, coaches will often say a player is "thinking" too much rather than just reacting. That's what's going on here.
Or its the very real phenomenon that when people are scared they mess up otherwise easy things and 20 foot drops are scary.
What SKR is trying to tell you and everyone else is that there are mundane things, like walking over a gap in the sidewalk, that Taking 10 is meant to deal with efficiently.
The problem is that allowing the mechanic also trivializes EVERY check a character might otherwise reasonably make with a little bit of skill, including the skill half of a PFS scenario and leaping over a chasm of lava... some very fantastic things.
As a DM/Writer if you set the check at 10+ an average modifier someone can take 10 and get them all. If you set it higher then people are very likely to fail it.
A crowd watching and cheering, would count as a distraction IMO, especially when a person isn't used to doing something in front of others. High school, college, and even professional athletes can sometimes choke when the game is on the line. Take a look at this website:
You have people jump the tape then jump the foam blocks. Crowd is present for both, only one variable changed, experimental integrity is maintained.
Real life has auto-fails, but it isn't rolled on a 1d20. Real life should not be used as a primary basis for evaluating the rules.
... real life was used as a big component of the argument for take 10. I don't think using IRL for things that exist irl is entirely unwarranted. Pointing out why a piece of tape on the ground is different than a 5 foot pit and why the difference between the two DOES matter is incredibly relevant.
|
There are a number of problems applying your anecdote. First, we don't know what the DC is and we don't know the modifiers involved, for any particular situation. Just because a few people fail doesn't mean that the person right after them can't Take 10.Its a 5 foot wide gap ... so 5.
For anything that involves falling down during "automatic" tasks, I always assume there were negative modifiers for intoxication. Which also prevents you from taking 10 due to "distraction".
|
|
Unless the game limits you will a slot or pool or some other mechanism then "can" means "can all day long." If something takes a standard action then you can spend every waking 6 seconds of your day performing that action. Imposing a limit to that is definitely beyond game rules.The rules say I can make a perception check as a move action.Yes. But they do not say you can spend infinite move actions consecutively for the next 8 hours to make them. The rules are silent on this issue, hence the default to reality.
The fact that people can be on high alert all the time and looking all directions is part of the "fantasy element" of pathfinderThere is nothing in the rules that supports this conclusion as their is nothing in the rules that states that just because you can take a given action you can take that given action an indefinite number of times.
Please show me in the rules where it explicitly says this. Mind you, there is no explicit statement that says you can't. But that is rather the point. The rules don't say a lot explicitly when it comes to reality. They don't say, for example, what the word 'it' means even though the rules use that word hundreds of times. That is because they expect you to use reality to get that definition. So given no explicit rule to the contrary, or other compelling game design reason such as playability or practicality, then the default is to go with reality. And reality says you can't.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That is a player issue, especially if the tears were literal, the game was not being played by little kids.I generally encourage take 10 and often even suggest the option to new players.
But there is one situation where I hate it as GM - players who build their characters with auto succeed in mind.
The worst I encountered was a full group that always played together and had a take 10 DC30+for each skill spread across the group. Unfortunately that let to one player no longer being used to face possible failure.
In a social encounter EACH character was able to contribute at the same time. That player broke out in tears as he/she (rightly) assumed her Take 10 would fall short (her build wasn't diplomacy/bluff/perform or one of the other possible options) and she couldn't face a situation where she had to roll (actually I think she needed 12+).After two or three rolls of single digit we had tears at the table - despite the group overall still succeeding.
This wasn't fun for either side.
Have you been reading the boards lately?
|
|
I'm guessing the group that says that you can do the same action all day long has never looked at the hustling rules then.
Hustling is a specific rule that says what happens when you try to double move all day. Since there's nothing saying something bad happens if I double perception all day nothing bad happens.
|
|
I'm guessing the group that says that you can do the same action all day long has never looked at the hustling rules then.Hustling is a specific rule that says what happens when you try to double move all day. Since there's nothing saying something bad happens if I double perception all day nothing bad happens.
The rules don't say what the word 'it' means either. That doesn't mean you can define 'it' anyway you like (unless you are Bill Clinton). The rules not explicitly saying you can't do something is not same thing as them explicitly saying you can.
Please show me in the rules where it explicitly says this. Mind you, there is no explicit statement that says you can't. But that is rather the point. The rules don't say a lot explicitly when it comes to reality. They don't say, for example, what the word 'it' means even though the rules use that word hundreds of times. That is because they expect you to use reality to get that definition. So given no explicit rule to the contrary, or other compelling game design reason such as playability or practicality, then the default is to go with reality. And reality says you can't.Unless the game limits you will a slot or pool or some other mechanism then "can" means "can all day long." If something takes a standard action then you can spend every waking 6 seconds of your day performing that action. Imposing a limit to that is definitely beyond game rules.The rules say I can make a perception check as a move action.Yes. But they do not say you can spend infinite move actions consecutively for the next 8 hours to make them. The rules are silent on this issue, hence the default to reality.
The fact that people can be on high alert all the time and looking all directions is part of the "fantasy element" of pathfinderThere is nothing in the rules that supports this conclusion as their is nothing in the rules that states that just because you can take a given action you can take that given action an indefinite number of times.
Unless you can show in the rules where it is limited to a certain number of times per day, then "can" means "can" and that's all day long. There is really no question on this point. Mundane actions can be taken all day long without penalty (unless specific rules alter that, ie. Hustle)
|
Since it came up in another thread, I will ask for opinions here. This happened way in the past so it has no immediate effect, I'm just curious.
Hypothetical approximation of the situation as I vaguely remember it.
The whole party has invested heavily in the stealth skill. They are trying to sneak into the castle. There are patrolling guards on the wall, in the tower, at the gate, and some dogs in the courtyard.If you say there is no danger because no one is fighting yet, so the guards take 10 on their perception and the party takes 10 on climb and stealth checks.
The party will absolutely never fail at almost any concentration of guards. Standard NPC and even guard dogs have a much lower perception modifier than the PC's have stealth modifier. They will always be able to sneak into anyplace no matter how heavily guarded. So some posters were saying things like Stealth Synergy or even a heavy focus on the Stealth skill is completely unnecessary. You just take 10 and succeed all the time.If you say there is danger because they could be discovered and shot at, so the guards roll perception and the party rolls stealth every round on their infiltration. Some dog/guard is going to roll a 19 when someone in the party rolls a 2.
Now the party will almost always fail the infiltration without something like Stealth Synergy or really astronomical stealth skills so they literally can't be detected even with a very low roll. {This is what our group went with and to be honest, I can't remember for sure if take 10 was ever even brought up as a possibility. I guarantee we would have said that was 'immediate danger.' It was nearly impossible to ever sneak into anyplace with significant guards no matter how good we were at it.}One seems too ridiculously easy the other seems too horrifically difficult. Yes, in real life teams of trained people can sneak past guards. It does happen. But it also isn't so stupidly easy that almost anyone can do it. How would you guys rule this?
I would argue that a truly contested roll would not allow for take 10 in most cases. The contestation if the roll creates an external factor.
That said, there are many scenarios where the DC to fool the mooks is based off of take 10.
|
|
Unless you can show in the rules where it is limited to a certain number of times per day, then "can" means "can" and that's all day long.
Again, show me in the rules where it explicitly states that if something is not limited to a certain number of time per day then you can use it all day long, without restrictions by common sense, reality or even other rules such as the rules for fatigue. The rules do not say what you claim they are saying. They say nothing on the subject and, again, that is the point.
|
|
Please show me in the rules where it explicitly says this. Mind you, there is no explicit statement that says you can't. But that is rather the point. The rules don't say a lot explicitly when it comes to reality. They don't say, for example, what the word 'it' means even though the rules use that word hundreds of times. That is because they expect you to use reality to get that definition. So given no explicit rule to the contrary, or other compelling game design reason such as playability or practicality, then the default is to go with reality. And reality says you can't.
I don't think "reality" is the word you want to be using there. I'm trying to think of the proper word, but verisimilitude doesn't seem exactly right but is as close as I can think of. In the case of where the rules are silent on a subject, you go by what makes sense for the Pathfinder game/setting. Case in point, the absence of rules for needing to sleep. No where does it says characters have to sleep in the CRB, but according to the Devs, yes characters do in fact have to sleep.
Going by reality means that a number of animals can't use their scent, characters gain permanent injuries from serious wounds, you can heal someone who has stopped breathing underwater, fire doubles in size every minute, and a number of other things that do not appear in the rules.
According to the Pathfinder rules though, animals have scent whether it makes sense or not. You feel right as rain after a couple of days rest, even if you were on death door. Someone who runs out of breath underwater dies immediately. Fire doubles in size every 6-12 seconds (I don't know how any city's are left standing considering how easy it is for things to burn down).
So you go by what makes sense for the pathfinder world. Even if it sounds crazy sometimes. Not saying that taking 2 move actions every 6 seconds is allowed or disallowed, but as a pedant I hate you throwing around "reality" as the answer. Reality has no place here.