Anyone else hope the rules for taking 10 & 20 see some revision?

[Maniac]

Well, that stands to reason. In my original example, the guy getting a 20 by taking 10 gets over the wall, even ten checks would be involved. It's the guy who only gets a 19 that is in trouble, because that single lack of a bonus has ensured his chances of success went from certain to abysmal.

Isn't that a failure of how the skill system works then. Really the same thing could happen when rolling. If I roll a 15 but needed a 16 I missed it by one point - close does not count.

The missed climbing check could be interpreted as someone who almost made it but got a little overconfident and grabbed a loose rock or something.

The problem as I see it is the lack of levels of failure and success. If you miss by one you should be able to grab onto something with another check. If you make it by 5 or more you should be able to overcome the challenge more quickly.

I know that sort of thing has been included in some variations of D20 but I'd like to see some interesting consequences discussed for skill in 4e.

M.

 

[Psion]

Take 20 is just shorthand to save you time. Any outlawing it is de facto just costing you time with no real effect. Don't like it? For each take 20, make a roll on a random encouter table.

Not to mention, finding the trap does not remove it, and you can't take 20 to remove it.

Sorry, I think they work great as it.

BTW, wrong forum.

 

[Felon]

Of course it is. The RAW Search skill does not list a penalty for failure. You added one. House rule, simple as that.

I explained the nature of morphic game elements, but to elaborate further, I can pull out any number of spells that do things prohibited by another section of the RAW. The specific text of a spell allows for this. Likewise, I could be running an adventure that contained such a trap. In that case it would not be a house rule.

 

[Felon]

Isn't that a failure of how the skill system works then. Really the same thing could happen when rolling. If I roll a 15 but needed a 16 I missed it by one point - close does not count.

Again, my point is that the take 10 rules blows a big huge gap between the guy who has one more point of skill than the guy who can't take 10. He's not 5% less likely to succeed. One guy's at 100%, and the other's at 50% at best

 

[Felon]

BTW, wrong forum.

True, I intended it for the 4e forum. Left turn at Albequerque and all that.

 

[hong]

As many people have said, take 10 and 20 are fine. The REAL problem is in the binary nature of 3E skill check results: either you succeed or you fail. The DMG mentions a rule for partial success/failure, but it's rather obscure. This should be made a standard part of the rules IMO, or something like it.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Consider, for instance, that a given trap is designed to go off if touched even slightly. It is perfectly conceivable that a botched Search check might prod it and set it off.

"You generally must be within 10 feet of the object or surface to be searched."

Fortunately, given that my arms aren't ten feet long, I'm confident that I didn't touch the object I was searching even slightly.

True, I intended it for the 4e forum.

If only there were some way a thread could be moved...

... oh, wait... that would be me

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

As many people have said, take 10 and 20 are fine. The REAL problem is in the binary nature of 3E skill check results: either you succeed or you fail. The DMG mentions a rule for partial success/failure, but it's rather obscure. This should be made a standard part of the rules IMO, or something like it.

This was something barsoomcore did a lot of in the True20 game I played in at GenCon, and I really liked it.

DC of 20, and I rolled an 18? It wasn't so much a failure, as a success that didn't achieve quite the result I was hoping for. It made it more attractive to try risky things, because you knew that even if you didn't achieve your goal, there was a good chance you wouldn't have completely wasted an entire round in the attempt.

-Hyp.

 

[Nahat Anoj]

This was something barsoomcore did a lot of in the True20 game I played in at GenCon, and I really liked it.

DC of 20, and I rolled an 18? It wasn't so much a failure, as a success that didn't achieve quite the result I was hoping for. It made it more attractive to try risky things, because you knew that even if you didn't achieve your goal, there was a good chance you wouldn't have completely wasted an entire round in the attempt.

Yeah, this is a good idea. It's not failure so much as it is success, with a catch ... Things like this should make the game more interesting.

 

[GlassJaw]

This was something barsoomcore did a lot of in the True20 game I played in at GenCon, and I really liked it.

DC of 20, and I rolled an 18? It wasn't so much a failure, as a success that didn't achieve quite the result I was hoping for. It made it more attractive to try risky things, because you knew that even if you didn't achieve your goal, there was a good chance you wouldn't have completely wasted an entire round in the attempt.

I do this quite often, especially with things like Spot, Listen, Sense Motive, Gather Information, Appraise, Knowledge checks - things that could easily have degrees of success. Not sure how I would handle it with Search. I mean either you find something or you don't. Tougher call.