Handling Opposed Checks....

mackenson

First Post
So, I've been DM'ing for about a year and I am still struggling with how to handle opposed checks.

I'm talking about the typical listen/move silently, spot/hide sort of stuff that needs to be checked regularly as a precursor to an encounter (esp. in a dungeon environment).

I've found the management of these checks really time intensive and I always feel as if I am bumbling through them to some degree. If I am doing these checks in secret (which is what I always do unless the player's are actively trying to avoid somethign they are aware of), I have to roll for all of the players plus all of the enemies. What's more, the odds always seemed tipped in the favor of whatever group is being passive (i.e. listening, spotting) since sure as heck someone in the group that stands a chance of being detected will roll low, and someone in the detecting group will roll high. Perhaps I am not doing them correctly?

One thought I had was turning these checks into a standard DC roll rather than an opposed roll. Perhaps the DC can be set at 13 + whatever bonus the monster has for the pertinent skill (i.e. listen or spot). I'd just need to make note of these DC's ahead of time to save myself some time looking through the stats, but it seems like it would make things easier to manage. Does anyone else do this? What base DC would be appropriate in this case?

As I said though, I might not be doing something correctly as is.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The simplest way to deal with this is to have everyone take 10. That way, you just look at the monster with the worst Hide skill to the PC with the best Spot skill; whoever has the higher bonus wins.
 

The simplest way to deal with this is to have everyone take 10. That way, you just look at the monster with the worst Hide skill to the PC with the best Spot skill; whoever has the higher bonus wins.

I rather like this.

At low levels, the range of a d20 is so much greater than the range of a potential Listen check - the randomness rules the roll. It's not as big a deal when you run a traditional party of 4, but when you start tacking on extra sets of ears it quickly gets ridiculous.

Sure, it's possible that one person could hear something that eight other people missed. Its also possible that most of the time those eight other people would frown at the guy with the -1 Listen check who claims to hear something and tell him to shut up. But it never seems to happen that way in the game.

-edit for clarity-
The suggested method moves towards making Listen/Spot into more of a Group Listen. If you wanted to pursue some sort of House Rule, the DM could also give the best Listen Bonus plus a couple +2 circumstances for each person over a certain Listen threshhold. Then roll the dice to see what happens. The sweet thing it that the "Group Listen" only has to be calculated once - when people go up in levels. No more asking, "Whats your Listen?"; the DM just rolls unobtrusively and is all set.
 
Last edited:


You're right, the probability of being spotted gets inescapable with a fair-sized body of Hiders and Spotters if rolls are made all around.

One thing that I've thought to do is have all the Hiders take 10, and then for the Spotters use the "Cooperation" rule on PHB p. 62 -- roll once for the highest Spot skill and add +2 for each effective person helping.
 

Just use take 10 for all passive Listen and Spot checks. Saves a lot of time, and makes for far more logical results.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top