Do you like rolling?

[Ambrus]

I've been mulling the issue of dice rolling lately. These thoughts arose when I began to notice my reluctance to roll dice in favour of taking 10 or taking 20.

Rolling dice is an integral part of most tabletop RPGs. Their random results emulate the vagaries of characters pitting their skills and abilities against each other or the challenges present in the fantasy world in which they dwell. They're also an adequate stand-in for the unpredictable twists of fate and the fickleness of luck that we've all experienced at one time or another in real life.

Perhaps more visceral than that though is the pleasure we experience when we cradle a die in our hands, give it a few shakes and let it roll across the tabletop while briefly holding our breath in both hope and dread. These little pieces of colored plastic determine the destinies of the characters in which we've invested so much of our time and effort. A great die roll can incite resounding cheers from a group just as a low one can inspire a roar of calamitous despair.

That's the way it's been since D&D's inception. But then, with the advent of 3rd edition, came the notion of "taking 10" and "taking 20". A simple idea; one which presented a means to speed up play by assuming that, all things being equal or given enough time, the success of certain actions would be all but assured.

So I've found myself more and more often in the following scenario. The DM presents the group with a situation outside of combat and gleefully calls for a die roll, perhaps for a skill check. I reflexively pick up my die and then, looking at a my modifiers, conclude that I might be able to succeed without rolling. I pause and ask the DM for the DC and, hearing the call, simply put my die back down and say "I take 10". Just like that I've eliminated the threat of randomness. Now here's what I find a little surprising; often the DM seems crestfallen. In some instances I've even had DMs insist that I roll regardless of circumstances that would allow taking 10. It's as if they resent my choice to not roll, to simply choose success without possibility of failure.

So where do you fall; do you prefer to roll the bones or seek to avoid it whenever possible? Do DMs enjoy rolling more than players? If so, why?

 

[Aus_Snow]

I really like 'Take 10'. And 'Take 20' has its place. I've even exported them (converted, really) to a couple of other games. Where it makes sense and suits the flavour, basically.

But yes, I also really like the part that dice play (or should, at any rate) in most RPGs. I enjoy their effects, as a player and as a DM. Same goes for those I game with (DMs and players.)

FWIW, I think 3e got it just about right with its mix of the two. A bit of tweaking, for my tastes, but it's not far off to begin with.

The truly unknown is a vital aspect to RPGs, IMO. And using dice contributes superbly to that.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I modified Take 20:

Take 20: When there is no distraction to a task, a character is not rushed, and there is no consequence for failure, he or she can make an attack roll, an ability check, an Action Save, or a skill check as though he or she had rolled 1d6+16 on the die.

 

[Garthanos]

I figured you could go one better and make a Take X
By choosing to Take Focus and/or Take your Time. The combination gives full range. No limit as to when you could do so because taking focus cost you defense while doing so... and with action economy taking your time has its own punishments ;p

Range limit of 1 to 20.

 

[Chrono22]

I like that it adds an element of risk to mimic the risk of failure. But I dislike when the proportion of skill/talent to risk is so low that consequently anything I do is determined by the roll and not my choices.
I settled for a compromise, and now use a stack of playing cards numbered one through ten in place of a die roll. It decreases the range, allows players to "take ten" by using revealed cards instead of drawing, and it keeps duplicate luck failure and luck success from ruining play.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

I like rolling dice, except where it is a silly exercise because there is the time and lack of consequence to take 20.

 

[Herschel]

"Taking '10' or '20'" is a crime against nature. 4E has it "right" if/when you auto succeed if your modifier is higher than the DC. Otherwise 'taking' a number is a cop-out for a DC system that's out-of-whack.

If something makes sense to automatically succeed, then no 'taking' of anything should be required, it just happens. Having to 'take' something is a ridiculous excess of rules in that case.

 

[Shoe]

I am a little skimpy on take 20, but it has its place. otherwise players will just roll and roll and roll over and over again untill they get the # they need. take 20 was designed to do away with this. Take 10 I am less of a fan of, but there is the occational situation when I'll allow it, generally for the sake of speed. Non-critical actions (like forging a horseshoe) can bog down the game if the player has to keep rolling and rolling over and over again. Generally i prefer rolls but only in cases where it DOES actually create the positive tension that you discussed earlier

-Shoe

 

[Raven Crowking]

"Taking '10' or '20'" is a crime against nature. 4E has it "right" if/when you auto succeed if your modifier is higher than the DC. Otherwise 'taking' a number is a cop-out for a DC system that's out-of-whack.

If something makes sense to automatically succeed, then no 'taking' of anything should be required, it just happens. Having to 'take' something is a ridiculous excess of rules in that case.

I disagree with this, but then I guess I'm more of a simulationist guy.

Climbing something, for instance, might be DC 15, where, by taking your time (Take 10), Bob can assuredly succeed (he has a +5 modifier). Take 10 here just means that if Bob takes his time, he is going to succeed. No roll is needed.

But, when Sue pelts Bob with an arrow, the DC hasn't changed -- just his ability to concentrate fully. So a skill roll is appropriate.


RC

 

[Odhanan]

I generally prefer to challenge the player's wits rather than the character's stats.

A buttload of needless, and frankly pointless, dice rolling then simply does not occur when you start playing this way. The players' wits are challenged, and if they take the bait and get engaged, then they'll have a lot of fun themselves. Then, when a dice roll is called for, it'll be all the more interesting, as it'll provide a change of pace, and the chance for meaningful random outcomes to impact the way the game unfolds.