ValhallaGH
Explorer
I've got a couple of points about this proposal. I'm going to go through them in order, please try not to take offense as none is intended.airwalkrr said:Give the ranger a +3 competence bonus when making Survival checks to track creatures outdoors, then let anyone with Survival make track checks, then raise the base DC of track checks to 15 or 20. Tracking should be harder than it already is anyway, especially since you can usually take 10 on it.
1) This will make the Ranger a worse tracker overall as the bonus is less than the increase in tracking DC, putting rangers at a net -2 for tracking compared to their current situation.
2) Applying the bonus only outdoors makes no sense in either themantics or game mechanics. "Uh-oh guys. There's a roof over my head. I can't follow these tracks anymore, sorry."
3) Tracking is almost always a plot device designed to get the PCs from where they are to where they should be. Making it more difficult makes it harder to get PCs where they should be, and that's already a moderate nightmare.
4) The issues with tracking hinted at in your proposal may stem from not following the tracking rules closely. Tracking speed is assumed to be half normal speed; going faster (up to normal speed) imposes a -5 penalty on tracking. If the characters wish to travel faster than their quarry, thus catching it before it reaches its goal, then they'll usually need to travel faster than normal (-20) for an extended period of time (allowing use of extended hustling and forced march rules). Tracking through high-traffic areas, such as city streets, is possible but difficult since the crowd can easily impose a similar penalty to various natural condition (hiding trail, rain, snow or all of the above). Finally, the base difficulty is dependant upon the type of ground being covered. Soft river mud has a base of 5, a typical farm field will have a base of 10, most dirt roads and grasslands will have a base of 15 and stone or similarly hard materials have a base of 20.
The above are why I disagree with your proposal.