Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
3.5 Question - Single or Multiple Checks
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Water Bob" data-source="post: 5282422" data-attributes="member: 92305"><p>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%.</p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p>My first inclination is to pick the guard with the best Listen skill and use that one roll to represent all the guards.</p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>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.</p><p> </p><p>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).</p><p> </p><p>I need to think hard on that--that's some damn fine, easy-cheesy, GMing.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Water Bob, post: 5282422, member: 92305"] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
3.5 Question - Single or Multiple Checks
Top