Stopping take 20 Searching.

[Mark]

I'd let them take 20 but there's no way I'd let them get away with some of the time scales that have been mentioned here. 2 minutes per square? Whatever. Maybe for a featureless stone corridor that has no seams, blocks or morter. Taking 20 to me means doing everything you can think of to search in that room. That means picking every single item up, looking it over, and putting it off to once side that has already been seaarched and continuing on. If there is many things to look at in the room it's going to take a long time. All furniture will have to be moved. All cabinets and bookcases emptied, inspected, and moved if possible. Floorboards pulled up. Stones pried out. Etc. that's going to take time. In a storeroom or library, hours or days will have to be spent to inspect everything. So, my solution for this is to say that each successive search would take more time as in each search, they're going to have to get more and more detailed which is going to take more and more time. The first search roll might only take a round ( and I doubt I'd ever give them that time scale for anything larger or more complex than an unclutered tabletop). The second would probably take a minute in just stopping and looking around for places they might have missed and thinking about the problem. To take 20 would take longer than 20 times their initial attempt in something like that.

That's a level of detail that is hard for most GMs to keep up all of the time but I agree with the sentiment.

 

[RFisher]

I like take-10, but I don't like take-20.

I like using 3d6 or 4d6 (read 6s as zeros) or mid20 (roll 3d20, keep the middle one) for skill checks. With the 4d6, take-20 would take 1296× as long instead of just 20× as long.

Or I like applying a cumulative -1 to every retry. This effectively makes the idea behind take-20 not possible. (Since on your rhetorical 20th roll you'd have a -19.)

Sometimes I like to do both.

 

[diaglo]

I like take-10, but I don't like take-20.

I like using 3d6 or 4d6 (read 6s as zeros) or mid20 (roll 3d20, keep the middle one) for skill checks. With the 4d6, take-20 would take 1296× as long instead of just 20× as long.

Or I like applying a cumulative -1 to every retry. This effectively makes the idea behind take-20 not possible. (Since on your rhetorical 20th roll you'd have a -19.)

Sometimes I like to do both.

when refereeing other editions i like to give the players a description of what the see.. this is = to a take 10 in 3.11ed for Workgroups or 2000ed.

if they want to do a further more intense search i roll 1d6. and describe what they find based on the die.

if they want to do a complete search i ask them how long they take. and then describe based on length of time spent.

still some things they will never find at that time due to the die. but they can come back later with a refreshed mind and maybe different perspective and try again.

 

[swrushing]

[/QUOTE]

With a typical party of 5, spreadout in a standard room, this doesn't take much time at all.

assume 30x30 room, 36 squares, 5 squares oer 2 minutes, thats about 15 minutes to search each room of this size.

Do they also search hallaways, like ones which can contain secret compartments or secret doors leading to rooms. if not, thats one way to keep things from being found, and if they do, their progress is slowed a lot more.

all this times let other people/things do things.

Short of simply not allowing taking 20, what are some good ways to make time more relevant?

its easy: time is relevent if other things are happening that the pcs wont like.

have other things happening the pcs wont like.

Wandering monsters doesn't do much, since the PC's will just kill them. (And if they can't kill them, they're in the wrong dungeon.).

here i think is the big definition problem.

if your adventure setting is basically full of "xp sitting in room waiting for pcs to come kill it" then that choice has made time irrelevent. that choice makes take-20 all the time the smart choice, not a tough choice.

Switch the definition from "wandering monsters" to "local inhabitants". LHs don't wander go to get water, go to take a wizz, go to grab, perhaps literally, some food, and maybe just go fown the hall to talk or mate with their fellows and LHsdon't just sit and wait or wander.

The danger from LHs is if they walk in on the room you cleaned out a few minutes ago, they might not rush in to be killed, but instead might go get help. and while the pcs search, the adversaries in several roms ae gettng together and planning what to do.

They might be waiting in ambush for the PCs a little further on. They might be releashing the chained up beastie they have kept hidden. they might be setting traps. heck, they might be skeedaddling out the secret exit with their most prized valuables if they have figured out the pcs are too tough.

searching while the place in inhabited and after you have left a trail of bodies and ransacked rooms means you are increasing the odds of your surprise going away and the enemy now acting in concerted effort.

or think of it this way... if you went downstairs at night for a snack and found your roomate dead on the kitchen table and the litchen ransacked, what would you do?

So... What do you do to avoid this minor annoyance? Any good "realistic" reasons for the PCs to hurry through a dungeon? Maybe with enough examples, I can incorporate one into every dungeon crawl I run...

i have the slow down increase the odds of their presence being fiscovered and this turning from a sneak raid into an assault vs alerted bad guys fighting in their home turf.

now, you know what this will do?

the PCs will go on assault mode first, killing/eliminating the threats and then once they have cleared the place of foes and secured the front door, then when its "safe" they slowly search the place, taking 20.

 

[GlassJaw]

I like using 3d6 or 4d6 (read 6s as zeros) or mid20 (roll 3d20, keep the middle one) for skill checks. With the 4d6, take-20 would take 1296× as long instead of just 20× as long.

Or I like applying a cumulative -1 to every retry. This effectively makes the idea behind take-20 not possible. (Since on your rhetorical 20th roll you'd have a -19.)

Holy ridiculously unecessary calculations Batman!!

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Someone brought up airport security. PCs aren't the airport security of their age; they're the crack special forces! And for what it's worth, airport security must have a pretty high average Search check if it doesn't Take 20 99% of the time.

I once saw a house that the DEA had searched. They used sledge hammers on the walls. Now that's 'Taking 20'! Canadian Customs has been known to strip a car down to it's frame... reassembling is not their problem...

The Auld Grump

 

[Romnipotent]

break it up a little

The party has entered a 40ft cube room, a detect magic shows up some illusions, then BAM
"You find the floor tilting..."
"What?"
"Its starting to tilt, soon you find yourself at a very difficult angle to stand up"
"What?! Dont I get a chance to react?"
"At about 60% a few seconds have passed, you're now capable of acting, balance, climb, or a tumble check"
"Can I use jump?"
"Okay"
"The room keeps turning"
"We're stuffed"
"You are now on the roof, the doors seem to end with solid rock"
"We search for a lever, activation thingy, taking 20..."
"The floor starts moving, angling in the perpendicular to the former"
"..."
"The other way"
"Ummm...."
"You find yourself in a 40ft x40ft x 40ft room, each wall, floor, and ceiling has a hatch."
"Uh oh..."
(ooc) "OH SNAP! WE'RE IN THE CUBE!"

sometimes spending too much time in a room is bad

 

[RFisher]

BTW, the place where the take-20 rule really bothered me was picking locks. If I set the DC for a lock (in a safe place where take-20 is likely) at 25, then a character with a +5 to pick locks picks it everytime while a character with a +4 never does.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

BTW, the place where the take-20 rule really bothered me was picking locks. If I set the DC for a lock (in a safe place where take-20 is likely) at 25, then a character with a +5 to pick locks picks it everytime while a character with a +4 never does.

How is this a problem with the Take 20 rule?

This is a problem where the character with +4 can never, no matter how hard he tries, pick this lock.

The character with +5 has a 1 / 20 chance of success each time he tries. Eventually, if he keeps trying, he will succeed. No ifs, ands, or buts. "Taking 20" is shorthand for "I keep trying until I'm sure I've done my best."

Again, how is this situation a problem with the Take 20 rule?

 

[Henry]

the place where the take-20 rule really bothered me was picking locks

It simulates plausibility for me; in real life, some things are just plain BEYOND a person without help (aid another), or for someone without sufficient training (more skill ranks or skill focus).