Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6284735" data-attributes="member: 1465">I see your point, I'm just saying that personally I like randomness because unpredictability usually makes the game more exciting (for my tastes of course).There is no problem in letting one take 20 (or automatically succeed) on things that are not exciting per se, such as baking a pie or write a letter. If you want them to be occasionally exciting (are you baking a special pie to impress the king? are you writing a letter to plead the bishop a favor?), you can always put a check back in the game if you want randomness. I understand that some people don't want randomness even in this case, they favor predictability over unpredictability. I just don't, in general (although I wrote many times that the d20 feels too swingy for skills).I do think however, that there are cases where Take20 removes some kind of unpredictability that is to me especially dear. Lockpicking and searching for hidden things are the most important ones, since the exploration pillar is my favourite part of the D&D game. At least if the time required for Take20 is vastly increased, so that it effectively restricts using Take20 to a rare occurrence, it would be already an improvement. But in 3e it takes one round to open a lock, i.e. 2 minutes to Take20. That equates to nothing in the context of the exploration phase, it always leads to the player maybe rolling once or twice just for fun, but then always using Take20 because it cannot fail (or complain with the DM if it does).edit: Let's also remember that 3e had another concept, that of Take10. At least that concept works a little better for me because it is not an automatic success, but the truth is that it is really a sign that d20 has a too large range.Maybe a slightly more complex rule such as skills requiring a d10+10 roll when in comfortable conditions, and a d20 when in uncomfortable conditions, but no retries after X hours/days/weeks (depending on the skill) would work even better for me.</blockquote>

Verification