Anyone else hope the rules for taking 10 & 20 see some revision?

[Storm Raven]

"No, you searched quite a bit longer than that, but at your present skill level, you couldn't find anything. There may not be anything to find, but if you wish to search for traps again, come back when your skill has increased. Or describe to me in more detail where and how you are searching and we can play that out. If you want to just roll for it though, you'll need to increase your skill rank to get another crack at it."

A standard Search check takes 6 seconds.

If you do an extensive Search for a couple minutes, that's Taking 20.

So, basically, you let people Take 20, you just don't give them any additional benefit for the extra time.

And then you make them play "mother may I".

I'll stop here, saying more would run the risk of getting banned.

 

[Felon]

They usually play one out of a need to deal with locks, as I don't use *that* many traps. That said, I'd like to try to find ways to make them more useful and-or necessary rather than try to sink them outright.Then design better traps. As for picking pockets, a true Thief (i.e. greed-motivated) would still do so anyway, I'd think, yet one never hears of it now.That's one rule I'd throw out in a heartbeat, changed to anything that can take damage can take critical damage. Everything - even a construct - has a key piece that holds it together; all you have to do is find it and hit it.I'm not about to ban Thieves. As I said above, I'd rather make them more playable by giving them their niche back that all the other classes...ironically enough...stole.

You managed to miss the point completely. You don't need to ban rogues (which you keep calling "thieves" for some reason). You just need to accept that your people don't want to play them. Why spend a lot of time trying to devise ways to get people to order the poached salmon?

 

[Lanefan]

You managed to miss the point completely. You don't need to ban rogues (which you keep calling "thieves" for some reason).

Because I've never agreed with the name change from (was it 1e to 2e?). "Thief" has far more flavour and carries many more implications than "Rogue"...

You just need to accept that your people don't want to play them. Why spend a lot of time trying to devise ways to get people to order the poached salmon?

However, instead of meekly accepting that they're not getting played, I'd rather find out *why* and try to fix it. If people aren't ordering the poached salmon because of a flaw in the recipe, isn't it better to fix the flaw? Just removing it from the menu denies it to those who *do* order it despite its flaws...

Lanefan

 

[Gentlegamer]

A standard Search check takes 6 seconds.

The written guideline for a Search check is 6 seconds. I may rule that the search takes more or less time depending on the various circumstances.

If you do an extensive Search for a couple minutes, that's Taking 20.

In general, I rule that extensive use of certain actions/skills requires descriptive action by the participants. It may be that I just use the descriptive action to prompt the "Take 20" first (describe how you will extensively search and then I give you the "20"); it may be that only descriptive action will be successful, it depends on the situation.

So, basically, you let people Take 20, you just don't give them any additional benefit for the extra time.

Note: this is a search for traps, which signifies potential danger, so Taking 20 is inappropriate (or at least I would rule it to be so in this case).

And then you make them play "mother may I".

I'm merely describing how I would adjudicate such a situation as referee.

Any time a player wishes to use descriptive action to accomplish something, I'm open to it. In this case, the character's "saving throw vs. finding traps" has not found any traps (assuming there are traps to be found, I may make the Search roll behind the DM screen), so now the player is free to use descriptive action to continue searching, just as any player may who doesn't have extensive ranks in Search (or any other skill that is of a non-technical nature).

Using descriptive action is not playing "mother may I;" it is adjudicating the players' actions through communication among the participants. This is at the heart of any role-playing game.

 

[Lanefan]

"No, you searched quite a bit longer than that, but at your present skill level, you couldn't find anything. There may not be anything to find, but if you wish to search for traps again, come back when your skill has increased. Or describe to me in more detail where and how you are searching and we can play that out. If you want to just roll for it though, you'll need to increase your skill rank to get another crack at it."

A standard Search check takes 6 seconds.

If you do an extensive Search for a couple minutes, that's Taking 20.

So, basically, you let people Take 20, you just don't give them any additional benefit for the extra time.

A simple 1-round search is a roll. A search for a few minutes would be Taking 10. A search for half an hour would be Taking 20.

I too would *far* prefer the player give me some specifics on what they're trying, and I'm more than willing to give specifics about the situation if required. So what if it takes up a little game time.

And then you make them play "mother may I".

You say this like it's a bad thing. What can possibly be wrong with "I try {xxxxxx} - do I discover anything?" Far better than a dull, bland "Take 20 on Search"...

Lanefan

 

[Victim]

A simple 1-round search is a roll. A search for a few minutes would be Taking 10. A search for half an hour would be Taking 20.

I too would *far* prefer the player give me some specifics on what they're trying, and I'm more than willing to give specifics about the situation if required. So what if it takes up a little game time.You say this like it's a bad thing. What can possibly be wrong with "I try {xxxxxx} - do I discover anything?" Far better than a dull, bland "Take 20 on Search"...

Lanefan

Taking 10 doesn't require any additional time.

 

[Quasqueton]

I had a DM one time that disallowed Take 10 for opposed rolls like Hide and Move Silently.

Our party of 4 PCs tried to stealth past some enemies. I said, "I get 18 on Hide and Move Silently."

"You didn't roll," the DM said.

"I Take 10 on them."

He explained his dislike and disapproval of the Take 10 mechanics. So I rolled for both skills.

"Okay. I get 12 on Hide, and 24 on Move Silently."

The the other 3 Players had to roll their two checks, and the DM wrote down all our numbers. Then the DM had to roll 2 checks (Spot and Listen) for each of the enemies.

So he wrote down 8 different numbers and rolled 8 times to compare results. The whole thing could have been handled with Take 10 much faster with less wildly varying numbers.


As for Take 10 with things like +10 vs. +8 skill modifiers -- use the "DM's best friend" rule. Let the less skilled character declare that he's taking his time on the climb to get a +2 circumstance bonus. Poof! The more skilled character scales the wall at the normal climb speed, and the less skilled climber manages to get up but takes more time.


Mark me down as one who thinks Take 10 and Take 20 are wonderful rules. When understood and used, they have always saved time and improved the play of the game, in my experience.

Quasqueton

 

[Quasqueton]

As for Take 10 with things like +10 vs. +8 skill modifiers -- use the "DM's best friend" rule. Let the less skilled character declare that he's taking his time on the climb to get a +2 circumstance bonus. Poof! The more skilled character scales the wall at the normal climb speed, and the less skilled climber manages to get up but takes more time.

Heck, how about just saying Take 12 takes x4 amount of time as Take 10, Take 14 takes x8 amount of time, Take 16 takes x12 time, Take 18 takes x16 time, and Take 20 takes the normal, RAW, x20 time.

Edit: Might need to remove the restriction on Take 20 rule. Or instead of "Take 16", give a +6 circumstance bonue for taking twelve times as long.

Quasqueton

 

[Storm Raven]

A simple 1-round search is a roll. A search for a few minutes would be Taking 10. A search for half an hour would be Taking 20.

Wrong. Read your rules.

A Take 10 is a single use of the skill - for a Search check it is defined, by the rules, as one round in length. A Take 20 takes 20 times as long as a single use of the skill - for search, that would be two minutes.

It seems that your problems with the Take 10 and take 20 rules stem from a misunderstanding of those rules and how they work.

I too would *far* prefer the player give me some specifics on what they're trying, and I'm more than willing to give specifics about the situation if required. So what if it takes up a little game time.You say this like it's a bad thing. What can possibly be wrong with "I try {xxxxxx} - do I discover anything?" Far better than a dull, bland "Take 20 on Search"...

Playing "mother may I" with the DM is the crappiest thing that crops up in RPGs. It is like trying to read the DMs mind and come up with the magic words to get an infodump. My character has skills I do not have - I should be able to play the game without playing Calvinball with the DM.

 

[Storm Raven]

I had a DM one time that disallowed Take 10 for opposed rolls like Hide and Move Silently.

Our party of 4 PCs tried to stealth past some enemies. I said, "I get 18 on Hide and Move Silently."

"You didn't roll," the DM said.

"I Take 10 on them."

He explained his dislike and disapproval of the Take 10 mechanics. So I rolled for both skills.

I'd have packed up and left right there. A DM who does not use the Take 10 and/or Take 20 rules because of "dislike and disapproval" (or even worse, inability to understand them) isn't worth wasting time on, regardless of any other considerations. He's basically saying "I like to pointlessly waste my time and yours for no benefit to the game".