Stopping take 20 Searching.

[sfedi]

When I DM I have no problem with PCs taking 20 in every square.
It akes a loooong time.
But sometimes you have that time.
And it doesn't consume ANY time at the table.
That's standard operation procedure for the party:
-clear the zone
-take 20 in Search
It`s over in a flash.

I really don't see where you have a problem.

As a player, we usually don't have time to take 20 in a dungeon crawl. Because of hr/lvl spells and 10 min/lvl spells.
But when it's over, Search take 20 is our friend

 

[diaglo]

When I DM I have no problem with PCs taking 20 in every square.
It akes a loooong time.
But sometimes you have that time.
And it doesn't consume ANY time at the table.
That's standard operation procedure for the party:
-clear the zone
-take 20 in Search
It`s over in a flash.

I really don't see where you have a problem.

As a player, we usually don't have time to take 20 in a dungeon crawl. Because of hr/lvl spells and 10 min/lvl spells.
But when it's over, Search take 20 is our friend

ditto.

also in game search = roll for a quick check for danger is probably the best you can do to avoid taking too much time. nothing wrong with a rolling. it takes less time and you can come back later and search take 20 afterwards if you get stuck.

 

[Psion]

I think it is more of a tedium thing...

Um, the take 20 rule is there to PREVENT the tedium of listening to the player describe how they continue to search and roll dice.


I personally think it's a bad idea to try to engineer around the take 20 "mechanic". (I say mechanic because it's not really a mechanic so much as shorthand for lots of rolls.) Why not just USE it?

The main limitation on taking 20 is it takes time. If you don't want the party to always find something and they always have the time... whose fault is that?

One rule of thumb I have for this effect is: if the party ever takes 20, roll an encounter check.

 

[Thanee]

I like the Take 10 and Take 20 rules, they are great!

Very little is more stupid then just having to roll a single search check and not being able to take more time to search to get a better result. The good thing with Take 20 is, that you do not get a bonus to your roll, so you cannot act outside of your actual ability. You just get your best result automatically. Sounds just about right.

Forensics would be rather unreliable, if they had to actually "roll" for their "search checks".

The enemy of taking 20 is the environment. If there is enough time to search thoroughly then why not do it?

But if time is not always available in abundance, if lingering in one place for long carries a certain risk, then you would have to decide if you want to take that risk. If there is no risk and no time pressure, then there is no reason not to do it. And rightly so.

Bye
Thanee

 

[rvalle]

Have the party being chased by something/someone else that they don't want to fight.


They know another adventuring party is in the dungeon too and its a race to see who gets to 'the end' first. It does not have to be an 'evil' group or anything... just another group there that is NOT taking 20 to search every room.

I think others mentioned this... start having other creatures in the dungeon be prepaired. The opposite needs to be true too though... as long as they keep moving they have a bit of momentum going and, while the creatures might know something is going on from the noise of battle they will not be as prepaired as if they party stops for 30 min to search every room.

rv

 

[mark_j]

You're the DM, houserule "take 20" checks away. The "M" in DM stands for "Master," not "slave the the player's metagaming"

Also, throw the whole "CR/EL" crap out the window a few times with your wandering monsters. That will wake them up for sure. The character's strength dictating the difficulty of every encounter is going to get stale fast. Scare them a few times.

You could always play an earlier edition. Of course, your players probably wouldn't like that after all the careful munchkin crafting they already have invested in D20.

Edit: As you can tell, I don't think your players are roleplaying their characters very well in this instance. "Take 20" searching every room? Meta/power-gaming at its finest.

 

[GlassJaw]

I don't mind my players taking 10 or 20. Actually, I'm usually telling them they have the option to do so!

If a dungeon is a dynamic environment, rather than a static one, wasting hours searching every room isn't a good idea.

This is great advice. I've been running a lot of dungeons lately (currently running the Dungeon Adventure Path) and the first couple of dungeons have a good amount of secret doors. The party became wise to this and started searching diligently. Makes perfect sense to me. However, as a DM, you really have to get away from the "wait for the players to enter the room" type dungeons. If they haven't taken care to be quiet, things should come looking for them. Or, in my case, set up ambushes and traps.

You're the DM, houserule "take 20" checks away. The "M" in DM stands for "Master," not "slave the the player's metagaming"

Oh I see. So if the players aren't playing the way you want them to, break the rules? Again, why is it metagaming? If they are in a dungeon and they suspect secret doors, why wouldn't they search for them? It would be stupid of them if they didn't.

 

[azmodean]

I'm in the "what's the problem?" crowd, but to expand on a scenario that has already been presented...

Have the inhabitants organize if they have time, but more importantly, let the party know that this will happen somehow beforehand. Alternately, have an encounter that the party probably can NOT handle around, and if the party gives the defenders time, they will go get the encounter (big monster or NPC probably). Once again, let them know about this somehow beforehand.

Just because you don't want to force an encounter on your players that they can't handle doesn't mean that you can't use enemies in your plot that your players can't kill. Just give them the opportunity to escape from or work around the enemy instead of killing it.

It's about time for me to do this in my own campaign, the players are getting pretty cocky...

 

[Mercule]

Hah! I'd kill for your problem. My group sends the elven Swashbuckler on a walk-around the room. If she happens to roll a "3", then they assume there's no secret door. For actually searching the room, it's similarly abbreviated. They have missed so many goodies that I've lost track.

If you feel it's unrealistic for the characters to spend an hour searching a room, ask yourself why. Is it because it's dangerous? Boring? Something else? Make those reasons mean something. Wandering monsters work well for danger. Boredom could show up as a -1 penalty on Search/Spot/Listen checks for every 30 minutes the PCs spend actively searching without resting. That sort of thing.

 

[Hurtfultater]

You could stop hiding things for them to find. That might stop them from searching every square.

You could make the dungeon pretty much level and slowly flood it. A decanter of endless water would do, or you could have the players somehow break the wall of a large cistern or dam, and have the players go up through the dungeon. Then you can do other fun things like make the players decide between armor and treasure, and you get fun, nasty water creatures. Similarly, a large wooden structure can burn, and there's always the slowly opening portal of doom and evil in the basement. If your players are in aboveground ruins, make it clear that something nasty that they can't kill will wake up with the sunset. You can also poison your characters and make sure they can't get rid of it until they leave the dungeon (and possibly make it to town). You can also make the game one of hot pursuit. You've got a ton of options here.