Search Skill and Taking 20:House Rule, no taking 20 on search checks

[Belzbet]

When setting hidden areas and treasure for PC's you can either: (1) set the DC to find the area/treasure with the search skill to a number the PCs can beat OR (2) you can set the DC to a number the PCs cannot beat.

The PC's can always take 20 on their search checks. So, as a DM you can set hidden stuff to a number the PCs can find or to a number they cannot find (ex. if +10 is the highest search modifier a PC in the group has then that PC can take 20 can find anything of search DC 30 or below, anything 31 or above CANNOT be found by the PC). It makes no sense to place stuff that PC's CANNOT find unless you are doing it so that the PC's cannot access it until later. Also, the only downside to searching (and taking 20 while doing so) is time, so you can make the adventure or area 'time sensitive.' this works fine sometimes but you cant do this all the time (sometimes time isnt a factor); anyway a group can always go back to the place and search it, unless you make it impossible to return (collapsing building, etc.) but you cant do this all the time either).

So, a fix to the "find anything with a take 20 search check" is to NOT allow PC's to take 20 on a search check. What do you think about this as a house rule?

 

[Ashtagon]

If a typical party is not searching at all, they can cover (30 x 600 rounds) = 18,000 feet per hour — about 3 mph.

If they do basic searches (d20 roll or take 10), than speed halves.

If they take 20 on each hex, they are spending 21 rounds on each square (1 to move, 20 to search), which means they will cover about 850 feet an hour.

Correction to maths:

Basic searches mean 5 feet every 2 rounds, or 1500 feet per hour.

Take 20 searches mean 5 feet every 21 rounds, or 140 feet per hour.

I think the existing take 20 rule covers this. Searching causes a ridiculous hit on your speed.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Today, 02:49 AM #3 (permalink)
felix51
has no status.

Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 6
Novice (Lvl 1)

Reported

 

[irdeggman]

Per RAW taking 10 takes no longer than a normal skill check, only taking 20 takes longer.

 

[Ashtagon]

Per RAW taking 10 takes no longer than a normal skill check, only taking 20 takes longer.

Agreed. Move action to enter the square, then a full-round action to search it. Or two minutes when taking 20.

Just realised you could take a 5-foot step to move into the next square when doing standard searches, instead of move actions. Which brings your speed up to 3000 feet per hour.

So...

Normal walking: 18,000 feet per hour

Search: 3000 f/h (1/6 full speed)

Take 20: 150 f/h (1/120 full speed)

 

[Sekhmet]

You could also place DCs just barely out of reach of a "take 20" (two or three points), so the PC's must have a circumstantial or temporary modifier in place.
I give PC's circumstantial modifiers (+2) when they take interest in a specific item or feature I've placed in the description of the area.

This more or less negates the necessity of altering any rules.

I feel I should elaborate a small amount, due to the attention the post is getting.
Don't do this with every check, otherwise your wizards and bards and whathaveyou will be constantly buffing your heroes, and it will be a pointless waste of resources.
Also, make sure your room/hallway/whathaveyou descriptions are good enough to make your heroes WANT to take notice. If I describe a gently swaying chandelier in a deep, dark dungeon, you can bet my PCs are going to want to check it out. Why is it swaying? What is it doing here?
If I describe a hallway as six feet wide, narrowing to four feet over the course of the next twenty feet, my heroes probably don't give a damn, except for considering the strategic value of said hallway.

 

[TKDB]

I'm not sure I see the problem with taking 20 on Search checks; if you're willing to spend two solid in-game minutes scouring every last nook and cranny of a 5-ft cube (assuming it's on a wall or corner) space, that seems like a reasonable enough tradeoff for a maximized search check. The take-20 rule was practically made just for Search checks -- it's certainly the case where taking 20 is most commonly applicable.

If you want something to be hidden from casual view, but easy to discover if you're looking for something that's out of place, put it within range of a search check taking 10. If you want it to definitely be within the party's capability to find but requiring a bit more effort, put it between the take-10 and take-20 result (including aid another bonuses if you want to add a little more difficulty). If you want it to be definitively outside of the party's capability to find with their current resources, set the DC above the take-20 result (including aid another bonuses).

Seems like a reasonable system to me. The only reason I could see for wanting to disallow taking 20 on search checks would be if you wanted to add uncertainty as to whether the party could find the thing or not. But is that really necessary? Why would you even want that in the first place?

 

[Belzbet]

Seems like a reasonable system to me. The only reason I could see for wanting to disallow taking 20 on search checks would be if you wanted to add uncertainty as to whether the party could find the thing or not. But is that really necessary? Why would you even want that in the first place?

I want there to be hidden places/items/things that the PC's may not be able to get too. By taking 20 no hidden room is 'really' hidden, no item is really hidden either (you can make the DC to high to find and that doesnt make any sense either unless you are waiting to reveal that area/item until later). All the PC's have to do is take 20 and find every thing you hide in the level. It sort of takes the suspense out of finding hidden stuff (if only from a PC's perspective). I dont think it makes much sense to hide an item- but really its not hidden it simply takes a few minutes to find it by taking 20. Why not just leave everything out in the open and leave the hidden stuff for the occasional suspense and nothing more?

 

[TKDB]

I want there to be hidden places/items/things that the PC's may not be able to get too. By taking 20 no hidden room is 'really' hidden, no item is really hidden either. All the PC's have to do is take 20 and find every thing you hide in the level. It sort of takes the suspense out of finding hidden stuff (if only from a PC's perspective). I dont think it makes much sense to hide an item- but really its not hidden it simply takes a few minutes to find it by taking 20. Why not just leave everything out in the open and leave the hidden stuff for the occasional suspense and nothing more?

If you're looking to increase player involvement, I'd say set a limit on how much you can take 20 on at once. Rather than just saying "we search the room", make them narrow it down to "we search around the north wall" or "we search by that funny-looking statue". Taking assists into account also can help -- a lot of players tend to forget that's an option, so if you set the DC above the result of a take-20 but below a result of taking 20 with a couple of assists, that can help increase player involvement.

Also, it's important to really emphasize the tremendous amount of in-game time it takes to thoroughly search a decent-sized room by taking 20. For instance, looking over the dungeon map I drew up for the one-shot I ran a few months ago, it would have taken the PCs over 20 hours to search less than a quarter of the entire dungeon, assuming they were trying to maximize the check result by relying on the one with the highest modifier and everyone else using aid another to boost the check.
Even when the party isn't particularly under a time crunch due to story factors, it isn't really reasonable for them to spend whole days scouring every square inch of the dungeon. If the players really insist on doing it anyway, you could require concentration checks for every X amount of time spent on the search -- if they fail one, then they can't take 20 (or even retry a search check for a given area) for the next so many minutes/hours. In-character, there's no way that amount of tedium wouldn't start to wear on you after awhile.

Removing the take-20 rule entirely would just ruin the atmosphere in the opposite direction, by making the finding or not finding of things entirely up to the luck of the dice. Or dragging out the game by making the players roll over and over again to repeat the search until they get a nat-20 (which is what taking 20 is meant to represent). It might sound like it would build suspense to have them do that, but in reality it would just get really tedious after the first couple times.

 

[SethDrebitko]

Do you use wandering monsters? It would still let the players take 20 but also make them decide if it is worth it. Also if they are trying to find something as fast as possible before they get caught this is probably not an efficient way of searching.