Sneak VS. Perception?

[CCamfield]

Great minds think alike!

I remembered some relevant stuff in AEG's Mercenaries on the subject, looked it up, and it amounted to
- average alert sentries could be taking 10 on their checks, to reduce the amount of rolling (but not, the book suggests, Imperial High Guardsmen)
- an option of averaging the Move Silently/Hide and Spot/Listen values

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

I've tinkered with the idea. It mostly works.

There are a couple of sticky points, but with a little care they can be worked around. Is an invisible character in chainmail quieter (or a Silenced giant easier to hide)? What about blind creatures? A cat familiar grants an MS bonus, how do you work it in?

PS

As I said in my original post, Sneak and Perception would be used in addition to Hide/MS & Listen/Spot. They don't replace the original skills. You'd only roll MS vs. Listen in the case of an invisible opponant for example.

Because the oiginal skills aren't replaced, you can still use them when it's more realistic. If a creature has a +15 to spot, but a +1 to Listen, you'd probably want to use the normal D&D system. However, if a character's scores are less than 3 apart, A Sneak vs. Perception roll would be quicker.

 

[italianranma]

No need

The way we do it in my game is that if you are sneaking up on someone it's move silently vs. Listen. If you're sneaking away it's Hide vs. Spot or Search. The reasoning on this is that the Rogue is only going to sneak up on the Orcs if they're not looking in his direction. If they have guards that are actively watching I still wouldn't give them spot checks. If let's say that the orcs were camping in the middle of nowhere with absolutely no cover or concealment near, and had posted guards then I'd let the rogue know this and have her figure out that sneaking up on them is impossible.

 

[Silveras]

Am I the only one who has a problem with the number of dice involved in sneaking around?

Yes.


On the other hand, you could take a page from Mike Mearls in his CityWorks book (from Fantasy Flight Games). The guards are assigned a "Vigilance" score, based on their training quality (rabble to elite units), pay rate (overpaid, underpaid, etc.), morale, and some other situational modifiers (is the area heavily trafficked, is the city at war, etc.) that serves as a static DC for the Rogue to beat. The opposed roll mechanic makes sense when there is someone actively trying to see the character who is sneaking around; it makes less sense when the Rogue is trying to slip past a (probably) bored guard.

You could also just assume that basic guards are "taking 5" (not really trying hard).

 

[Chasmodai]

The thing about taking 10.

My bunch of people treat taking 10 as taking 10 times as long to complete the task. So assume that an orcish guard took 10 on his Listen check when the halfling rogue was Moving Silently past him, he'd only notice something was wrong about a minute later.

It's strange, and doesn't really make sense, so we don't allow taking 10 on Listen and Spot checks, as well as Hide and Move Silently. The only exception is for Hide, when you're in a cubby hole, or a warm corner, waiting to ambush someone/thing.

As for your Sneak/Perception idea - I think it's a pretty nifty one (since we don't take 10 on these things, and in the previous game we had, the DM decided to roll Spot/Listen checks for all 6 Vrocks we were sneaking past), though it has some... iffiness to deal with.

What if an area you're sneaking through imparts a penalty on your Move Silently check, but gives a bonus to your Hide? You may save some time on rolling dice, but then again, you might be wasting time on calculating your modifier (some players are notoriously bad at maths. I have a friend who needs to use his fingers).

It's a good idea, but there are some technicalities that needs to be ironed out.

 

[Aaron2]

My bunch of people treat taking 10 as taking 10 times as long to complete the task.

Man, that is wrong in so many ways.

One thing I've done in the past is to make one die roll for each character and have it apply to both skills.


Aaron

 

[Numion]

I would have the orcs 'take 10' on their spot or listen checks. Maybe give them a +2 circumstance bonus for being a group, or have two of the orcs help one to notice if I'm feeling really mean for a total of +4.

TAKE 10 DOESN'T TAKE 10 X TIME

 

[Chasmodai]

We derived this business of taking 10 times as long when taking 10 from the rules of taking 20 - which, by the way, does mean you take 20 times as long.

It's to discourage taking 10 cos nothing's more pleasing than the sound of dice rolling on the floor/book/table, coupled with the sound of someone going 'EEEE!' when it comes up a 1.

We're sadistic, random people, with sadistic, random dice.

 

[Ferret]

I'm a fan of Perception vs. Sneak, because it lets me make skill checks for things like scent, taste and "ESP" (perception of incorporeal stuff, "bad feelings" from psychically charged locations, and the like).

The more I play Exalted, the more I want a better skill system in D&D.

-- N

Those skills are good but some realy aren't up to scratch, I mean Beaurocracy.

 

[Aaron2]

We derived this business of taking 10 times as long when taking 10 from the rules of taking 20 - which, by the way, does mean you take 20 times as long.

It's to discourage taking 10 cos nothing's more pleasing than the sound of dice rolling on the floor/book/table, coupled with the sound of someone going 'EEEE!' when it comes up a 1.

As a DM, I usually have my NPCs Taking 10 in all the non-combat type stuff. So I just add 10 to their listen and use that forex.

It saves me lots of time and effort.


Aaron