D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] - Can you Take 10 or Take 20 on a Hide check?

[Number47]

So we've managed to accumulate +14 on our Hide checks? Great, we take ten. That gives us a 24 plus our own modifiers!

I fail to see how this is so different, if you want characters with high Spot checks to be able to see ambushes.

There is a good reason that ambushes work so well. They are good for catching people by surprise. Being suprised doesn't mean you are dead, after all. Why nerf the ambush?

 

[Henrix]

So we've managed to accumulate +14 on our Hide checks?

Circumstance bonuses are wholly up to the DM, and I would not allow that much. I'd stop at +2 or +4 or so.

Remember that circumstance bonuses only stack with circumstance bonuses from different circumstances.

 

[shoplifter]

Take 20 on a spot check = you don't see it ON THAT ATTEMPT. See above

And you never will, at least till it shoots a crossbow bolt into your chest. You can't take 20 on a Spot check, as its reactive. You either see/notice it the first time, or you don't. Not seeing 'it' IS the penalty. Characters don't know they're making a spot check, so there's no way they could check twice. Sure, if they tell me "we're keeping an eye out for anything out of the ordinary rather than gabbing between one another" I'll give them a +2 modifier to their checks, but that's about as far as I'll go.


Search on the other hand, is another story. In most situations, I allow parties to take 20s, as they're ACTIVELY looking for something on that stone floor, or in the desk. I ALWAYS make them roll when a trap is involved though, as not finding it (again) is the penalty for a low Search check.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Search on the other hand, is another story. In most situations, I allow parties to take 20s, as they're ACTIVELY looking for something on that stone floor, or in the desk. I ALWAYS make them roll when a trap is involved though, as not finding it (again) is the penalty for a low Search check.

No, not finding a trap is not a penalty. Not finding a trap puts you in no worse a position than if you had not attempted to Search.

A penalty is, for example, failing a Disable Device check by too much - you end up worse off than if you had not tried. Failing a Jump check to leap a chasm - you end up worse off than if you had not tried.

But Searching for a trap? If you don't Search, you don't know there's a trap. If you Search and fail, you don't know there's a trap. There's no penalty for failure.

-Hyp.

 

[shoplifter]

But Searching for a trap? If you don't Search, you don't know there's a trap. If you Search and fail, you don't know there's a trap. There's no penalty for failure.

-Hyp.

There COULD be a penalty for failure, AKA setting off the trap. You don't get 20 tries to find a trap that you could be setting off by searching thoroughly. Granted, not all traps work like that. Pressure plates and the like though, could be set off by hands searching the floor. How do you determine WHICH of the 20 attempts the PC finds that pressure plate? That's why I have my PCs make a roll in that situation. They still get the take 20 for the room, but for certain traps an actual result is sometimes necessary.

"Oops..didn't notice the crack where that pressure plate was.."

<bucket of green slime falls on pc>

 

[Hypersmurf]

There COULD be a penalty for failure, AKA setting off the trap. You don't get 20 tries to find a trap that you could be setting off by searching thoroughly.

Except that the text of the Search skill specifically allows a square to be searched from ten feet away. How do you set off a pressure plate when you're that far away from it?

Disable Device states that a failure can result in setting off a trap. Search does not.

The Search skill carries no penalty for failure and allows retries, therefore you can Take 20.

-Hyp.

 

[shoplifter]

OK, as written that's cool. I still fail to see how one could find many well-made and hidden traps from 10' away. Of course, thats not for you to say.

Anyway, I don't want to hijack the thread anymore than I've already done

 

[Pielorinho]

Except that the text of the Search skill specifically allows a square to be searched from ten feet away. How do you set off a pressure plate when you're that far away from it?

Adverbs are more important than you think. From the PhB, p. 81:

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

If the trap I'm looking for is covered up by a steel plate, there's absolutely no way I can find that trap on a search check from 10' away -- not unless I'm using a 10' pole or magic.

In fact, it'd be trivial, I'd think, to design a trap that cannot be seen except through the use of mirrors: just recess all moving parts of the trap and cover them up. In such a case, a failed search check won't set the trap off -- but approaching the trap close enough to make a search check might.

Daniel

 

[Number47]

You don't have to see all the parts of a trap to make a Search against it. You don't have to know how the trap would work at all. You simply note that a particular cobblestone is discolored and suspiciously higher placed than the ones around it.

 

[Urbannen]

There are some general problems with the Search skill. The idea that you can be within 10 feet of anything and make a Search check just doesn't make sense, since so many Search checks require tactile manipulation. Going through a desk, a treasure chest, or the items on a dead body require tactile manipulation.

The game doesn't make a good enough distinction between Spot and Search.

No one's really address the fact that once hidden and unmoving, a character is in essence a hidden object. You don't use Hide in order to determine the Search DC to find a hidden object, so why would you do so for an unmoving character? The Hide skill specifically says that it is usually used with a move action, and waiting in one spot in order to ambush someone does not involve a move action. Finding a spot to hide yourself is the same procedure you would use in order to hide a human-sized, flexible mannequin.

There needs to be a mechanic to determine how well you can hide an object, including yourself. It doesn't make sense that you can find a secret door from 10 feet away with a visual Search check, but non-elves have no chance of noticing the same secret door casually, regardless of their Spot check.

Food for thought:
1. How do you determine what the Spot DC is for an item that is hidden but that has only partial cover or concealment?
2. How do you determine what the Spot DC is for a living creature that is hidden and unmoving but that has only partial cover or concealment? Hide apparently, even though this doesn't involve a move action.
3. How do you determine what the Search DC is for an item that is hidden but that has only partial cover or concealment?
4. How do you determine what the Search DC is for a living creature that is hidden and unmoving but that has only partial cover or concealment? In other words, why is a hidden unmoving living creature any different than a hidden corpse, but definition an object?
5. How do you determine the Search DC for a living creature that has 100% cover or concealment? Items hidden in a desk have both 100% cover and Search DCs, for example.
6. How do you determine the Spot DC to notice hard-to-notice but visible objects from a distance?
7. Why can't you use Search to find obviously visible but hard-to-notice items from a distance when you are consciously looking for them?
8. Why is Spot sometimes used only unconsciously but other times consciously?