Where'd Taking 20 Go?

[IceFractal]

I was looking at the skills section, and I noticed something - while taking 10 is mentioned, taking 20 isn't. I find this an odd omission, because the whole point of having a rule for taking 20 is to streamline things and keep the game going - which 4E claims as a primary design goal.

They haven't "removed" taking 20 by doing this, because you can't remove taking 20 - it isn't just a rule, it's an inevitable consequence of the rules. All that taking the rule out accomplishes is making people actually roll the die repeatedly until they get a 20, which is hardly my idea of streamlined.

Although there is one upside - maybe some people will get the mistaken idea that taking 10 takes 10x the time out of their heads.

 

[thatdarnedbob]

I was looking at the skills section, and I noticed something - while taking 10 is mentioned, taking 20 isn't. I find this an odd omission, because the whole point of having a rule for taking 20 is to streamline things and keep the game going - which 4E claims as a primary design goal.

They haven't "removed" taking 20 by doing this, because you can't remove taking 20 - it isn't just a rule, it's an inevitable consequence of the rules. All that taking the rule out accomplishes is making people actually roll the die repeatedly until they get a 20, which is hardly my idea of streamlined.

Personally I don't think it's big loss as it stands. In 3E taking 20 was only used when there was no time pressure, no consequence for failing, and the task was possible. Previously to 3E, and now, I would say that this happened automatically in a narrative context. Perhaps I would describe the humor of the fighter straining for a long time before finally lifting the portcullis (I know, I know bend bars/lift gates covers this and doesn't allow retry but stay with me here), but success is guaranteed and few DMs would require that all of these rolls be made until that sufficient number showed up.

That said, I think a better change to the game could have been: if failure has no other consequence, you can never retry. Every time you attempt you fail. Knowledge skills work like that, so why not perception for finding traps and such? I know that several hidden doors and traps were discovered by the rogue simply remembering to take 20 on his skill checks. (search having no penalty for failure got my goat) I'm going to try it out sometime, see how the game changes. Who knows, it could be awesome.

 

[excepti0n]

Taking 20 is now automatic.

DMG p.41

Searching the Room: PCs use perception checks to find anything of interest in the room, such as treasure chests, secret doors, or a holy symbol of Zehir hidden on the body of the supposedly good priest of pelor they just captured. The PCs scour the room, rolling a lot of perception checks. Unless the characters are under a time constraint, assume that they’re going to roll a 20 eventually, and use the best possible perception check result for the party. (Effectively, this result equals the best passive perception check +10.) Assume the characters spend a minute or two searching, and move on to tell them what they find.

 

[Gort]

Taking 20 is now automatic.

DMG p.41

Searching the Room: PCs use perception checks to find anything of interest in the room, such as treasure chests, secret doors, or a holy symbol of Zehir hidden on the body of the supposedly good priest of pelor they just captured. The PCs scour the room, rolling a lot of perception checks. Unless the characters are under a time constraint, assume that they’re going to roll a 20 eventually, and use the best possible perception check result for the party. (Effectively, this result equals the best passive perception check +10.) Assume the characters spend a minute or two searching, and move on to tell them what they find.

Oh, thanks! I hadn't seen this rule in the DMG, but in the two sessions I've played this was how I ran it. I thought I was going to have to (gasp) houserule it!

 

[dervish]

Shouldn't the result for an all out search be the highest passive perception+10+2 for every character helping him? Seems in line with the aid another rules.

 

[Mort_Q]

Shouldn't the result for an all out search be the highest passive perception+10+2 for every character helping him? Seems in line with the aid another rules.

Sure, but that makes no real difference.

The DM sets the DC, and the DM knows the PCs perception scores.

The DM either wants you to find it, or the DM doesn't.

The only reason a DM would put it there, and make it impossible to find is if the DM has a plan for the party to find it a different way (like through a ritual).

 

[Makaze]

Shouldn't the result for an all out search be the highest passive perception+10+2 for every character helping him? Seems in line with the aid another rules.

Except that I wouldn't let players use the aid other rules for Perception. It's very much a personal thing much like a knowledge check, different than lifting a gate or holding the light while the rogue disarms the trap. But that's just me personally.