Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 6857503" data-attributes="member: 6778044">Hmm. Some interesting points when you think about it.i disagree about the no retries. It just doesn't make sense to me if a person's skill is high enough to succeed at a task that they won't eventually succeed at it. Nor do I think it has anything to do with game balance. I can't think of anything that breaks with acknowledging that fact that eventually you'll succeed. The time element is an important factor that can't be forgotten.But you're right, there's no mechanic for Take 20, in which there should be. Also, the Passive score is serving two similar but ultimately different purposes:#1. A replacement for the Take 10 mechanic that sets a floor for simple tasks.#2. An actual passive score, for use in opposed checks.The problem with the current ruleset is that the floor that is set for #1 feels too high. At least without a time component like the old Take 10 rule. I have also never liked the fact that you couldn't Take 10 or Take 20 when there was a danger element. I guess since everybody is rolling an attack roll each round, it's no different to just roll another skill check each round.I like my solution where the time element is built into the first roll. That eliminates the need for multiple skill checks during combat. But I'll have to think about the other issue with the Take 10. Obviously there's the possibility of just using the Take 10 and Take 20 rules from 3.5, but they had their own issues. My initial inclination is to either modify DCs to push them out of the range of automatic success, or reduce the amount of default value - instead of 10+modifier for a passive score, 5+ or 0+, but that also causes problems with opposed checks against a passive score. As a DM the passive scores are very useful. But the thing that now bothers me (thanks!) is that the essential replacement for Take 10 doesn't account for a time element. So I'm not sure how I'll handle that anymore. Other than opposed scores maybe allowing the passive score only for trained (proficient) skills.Something I'll have to think about. I have several ideas, just have to work through them.Ilbranteloth</blockquote>

Verification