D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 Question - Single or Multiple Checks

[Water Bob]

I'm fairly new to 3.5E. I was wondering how you DMs more experienced with the edition handle skill checks when more than one person could roll a check.

For example, let's say a lone PC thief is creeping down a hallway with open windows that look out on the battlements. Five guards are clustered around, talking to each other, trying to stay awake and keep the cold from finding a home in their bones.

There are curtains over the windows to keep the cold out, but they billow in the wind this high up.

The thief needs to move past these guards. The guards can't see the thief, because of the curtains, but they surely can hear him if he makes a lot of noise.

So, the thief rolls his Move Silently skill opposed by...what?

Does the one theif check go against five different rolls?

Or, do the guards only get one roll? Maybe using the Aid Another rule?



OK, let me make this a bit more complicated. Let's say three PCs are sneaking down the corridor, trying to sneak past the five guards. How do you handle that?

How do you DMs handle both of these situations?

 

[radmod]

So, the thief rolls his Move Silently skill opposed by...what?

Does the one theif check go against five different rolls?

Or, do the guards only get one roll? Maybe using the Aid Another rule?

Technically, by the opposed Listen checks of each guard. Also, technically, you can't "aid another" on a Listen unless someone has already heard. However, you're in the right frame of mind.
You've asked one of the most perplexing questions, in my mind, of the game mechanics.
This is a case when you get into diminishing returns. Say each guard has a 50/50 chance of hearing the unstealthy thief. That means totally the guards have a 31/32 chance of hearing him. Even if the thief is sneaky and each guard has only a 10% chance to hear that still means the guards have a 41% chance to hear.
If you used Aid Another as a general rule (roll once and give +2 for each extra guard) then as your number of guards increases the odds of the thief being heard can dramatically increase (in the above, the 10% chance of being heard becomes 50%)


However, you did ask what do we really do. The following sounds complicated but once you get the hang of it, it becomes second nature.
I consider a Listen check to be a move action based on the idea that the Quick Reconnoiter Feat gives a PC a free Spot and Listen each round. Yet, if the PCs/NPCs are being cautious, I treat it as a free action. I also tend to favor PCs listening over NPCs listening.
So I start with the following circumstances:
1) Active Listening: For example, the guards know "something is up." Each person involved rolls a Listen check.
2) Inactive Listening: For example, "who bothers to rob this place?" In this case, the PC rolls his Move Silently.
a) If it's relatively high, I fake rolls and the PC wins.
b) If it's low, everybody rolls.
c) If it's in between, one or two of the nearest guards roll (and I might give the PC a chance to 'freeze.')
3) Occasional Listening: Constantly listening can be tiresome, fatiguing and leads to "false positives." Thus, many guards listen every once in a while, every five rounds or more. What's fun is having a too-long actively listening guard get a "false positive" when the thief is trying to sneak by - freaks PCs out.

OK, let me make this a bit more complicated. Let's say three PCs are sneaking down the corridor, trying to sneak past the five guards. How do you handle that?

Slightly different. I'm more interested in the PCs abilities rather than the guards. In this case, EACH PC has to make a Move Silently. (After all, it's kind of hard to 'help' another player move silently.) Then I treat it as above. If a group has a clumsy, heavily armored Cleric in the group they deserve to be heard!

BTW, Hide is similar.
And you didn't ask it, but it has the same problems: Spot checks.
When PCs are inactively spotting (e.g. walking down a road), I tend to give Spot checks only to two or three characters who are closest to something they can spot. I've seen most DMs do it that way.

 

[Uder]

I'm fairly new to 3.5E. I was wondering how you DMs more experienced with the edition handle skill checks when more than one person could roll a check.

For example, let's say a lone PC thief is creeping down a hallway with open windows that look out on the battlements. Five guards are clustered around, talking to each other, trying to stay awake and keep the cold from finding a home in their bones.

There are curtains over the windows to keep the cold out, but they billow in the wind this high up.

The thief needs to move past these guards. The guards can't see the thief, because of the curtains, but they surely can hear him if he makes a lot of noise.

So, the thief rolls his Move Silently skill opposed by...what?

Does the one theif check go against five different rolls?

Or, do the guards only get one roll? Maybe using the Aid Another rule?

I would have the thief roll once, opposed by each of the guard's Listen rolls. Unless the guards had a reason to be alert, I would have them take 10 on the roll.

OK, let me make this a bit more complicated. Let's say three PCs are sneaking down the corridor, trying to sneak past the five guards. How do you handle that?

How do you DMs handle both of these situations?

I would require each PC to make a single MS roll (assuming the corridor is not especially long), opposed by the rolls of the guards. Again, I'd probably have the guards all take 10. If at any point the PCs would be in the direct line of sight of the guards, I would require Hide vs. Spot rolls.

 

[Ranes]

I would add +5 to the PCs' Move Silently checks, because the guards are distracted (PH78). I would also measure the shortest distance between PC and guard and make the check there, adding +1 to the PCs' MS checks for each 10' of distance.

 

[Water Bob]

Hmm. Things are so well laid out in this game, I'm surprised this is so perplexing. The second poster is correct in that, if I allow all five guards a Listen check, the odds unrealistically skew towards 100%.

There's a small note under the Listen skill in my core rulebook (Conan RPG 2E, which is based on 3.5E D&D) that suggests to only make one roll. That same little note isn't under the Spot check description, though.

My first inclination is to pick the guard with the best Listen skill and use that one roll to represent all the guards.

Like the earlier poster, I'm also inclined to keep the action focussed on the PCs. So, what I might do is roll the guard's Listen check behind the screen and keep that as target number to get across that corridor. Then, I'd have the PCs, individually, roll their Move Silent vs. that target.







The comment about a penalty for distraction is a good one, but it's really not addressing the point. I just made up a situation where several rolls might be made.

But since he brought it up, I do think a distraction penalty is in order. That's a good call. So, I'd give the PC thief a +5 to his Move Silently checks. But, I'd also make the PC make a number of Move Silently checks based on the PC's Speed and the length of the corridor, per the rules.







I like the Taking 10 idea, too, but in reading up on it, Taking 10 cannot be done when the character is distracted. If it was a lone guard out there, walking up and down the battlement, I think I'd use the Taking 10 option. But, since the gaggle of guards are standing around, shooting the horse droppings with each other, I think the highest Listen skill with the PC getting the +5 distraction bonus is a better way to handle this particular situation.

Although, I'll admit that sticking to the letter of the rule might not be the best way to go. There is something very appealing about not rolling behind the screen and just looking at the guard with the best Listen modifier, adding that to 10, and using that number as the target the PCs have to beat with their Move Silent checks (they'd get the +5 distraction bonus, too).

I need to think hard on that--that's some damn fine, easy-cheesy, GMing.

 

[Ranes]

I made my suggestion as an addendum to the previous post, not an alternative. I should have added, though, that I would just have the guards make one Listen check (using their best modifier).

I would not have a guard take 10 if he were distracted.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

Personally, I'd just roll a single Listen check for the entire unit of guards, perhaps using the "most attentive" guard's Listen ranks, with +1 or +2 for each additional "somewhat attentive" guard. This minimizes rolling by treating the check as a single unified encounter, but still allows you to give a little character to the guard unit: is it 5 guards, 4 of them throwing dice and not paying attention and only one "serious" one; or are they all alert and focused on listening for intruders.

For multiple PCs sneaking, I'd have each PC make his own Move Silently check against the entire guard unit's "Listen" skill, as described above. The game is focused on the PCs, and success or failure of each one should be more or less independent of each other.

I think any extra noise that masks the PC's own noise (eg, wind, guards' conversation, etc) is a circumstance penalty on the guards' group Listen check (rather than a bonus on the PC's Move Silently check). I don't know that it makes a huge difference, but it might in some cases, so I'd be sure to think of it this in case it matters.

The important thing in cases like this, IMHO, is just to be consistent. Whatever you decide, just make sure it's run the same way each time so the players have an idea how to approach such situations.

 

[frankthedm]

Rules don't change just because npcs are on one side and PCs are on the other. Guards get their one listen roll per intruder creeping past just like PCs get one listen roll each to hear an ambush coming.

 

[Vegepygmy]

So, the thief rolls his Move Silently skill opposed by...what?

Does the one theif check go against five different rolls?

Or, do the guards only get one roll? Maybe using the Aid Another rule?

I'd assume the guards are all taking 10 on their Spot and Listen checks, which effectively sets a single DC the thief has to beat. If, for some reason, the guards are especially alert, I'd have one of them roll and I'd give him a +2 circumstance bonus for having extra sets of ears around. (I wouldn't do +1 per extra guard, as some have suggested, because eventually you just run into the same problem of it being impossible to sneak past a sufficiently large group, whether that's 10, 20, 50 or 100 guards.)

OK, let me make this a bit more complicated. Let's say three PCs are sneaking down the corridor, trying to sneak past the five guards. How do you handle that?

The same way, but it's up to the players to decide whether they want to take 10 or not. You're only as quiet as your quietest member, so it may behoove the two stealthier players to take 10 on their checks (ensuring that an unlucky roll doesn't hose the rest of their group), while the clumsy one "takes his chances" and rolls, hoping for a good result. Or, if they think even their worst member can do well enough by taking 10, they can all do so.

Rules don't change just because npcs are on one side and PCs are on the other.

Frankthedm makes a good point, so I should mention that I similarly tweak the rules when the roles are reversed. IMO, if you give every individual spotter/listener a roll, you just make stealth an unusable tactic, and I don't want to do that.

 

[radmod]

Rules don't change just because npcs are on one side and PCs are on the other. Guards get their one listen roll per intruder creeping past just like PCs get one listen roll each to hear an ambush coming.

Yes. What I meant to imply was that since everything is based on PC actions, I start with the PC rolls and go from there (that way I can be lazy and not make all the calculations). In addition, I think it was 2e which went on and on about PCs being far better than us regular joes. So, even if a PC was exactly the same as a generic NPC (guard, farmer, etc. but not Big Bad Guy), I would let PCs do things that NPCs can't or don't. I imagine a lot of us do that whether we realize it or not.