Take 20 ... gone?

[drquestion]

Heck, is there any skill where you _can_ take 20, with the exception of Search as noted above? It looks like all skill uses now have penalties for failure or can't be retried.

I think you're right. Presumably, that's why it's no longer in the PHB.

The DMG, though, does say, on p. 41, that when characters are searching a room "unless the characters are under a time constraint, assume that they're going to roll a 20 eventually."

That's the main place it came up in 3e, anyways.

 

[Mort]

I think you're right. Presumably, that's why it's no longer in the PHB.

The DMG, though, does say, on p. 41, that when characters are searching a room "unless the characters are under a time constraint, assume that they're going to roll a 20 eventually."

That's the main place it came up in 3e, anyways.

Right.

As I said in my post earlier - 4e simply shifts things to the DM. If the players are in a place that they have lots of time and there is no consequence of failure they shouldn't even have to roll - the DM assumes they get the best result possible and narrates from there.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Heck, is there any skill where you _can_ take 20, with the exception of Search as noted above? It looks like all skill uses now have penalties for failure or can't be retried.

I'm thinking a lot of checks that'd be rushed in combat would work for "taking a 20" out of combat.

For example, if you can topple a statue in one standard action with a DC 20 strength check, I can see taking a 20 to brace yourself and slowly shove it over.

 

[hong]

I'm thinking a lot of checks that'd be rushed in combat would work for "taking a 20" out of combat.

For example, if you can topple a statue in one standard action with a DC 20 strength check, I can see taking a 20 to brace yourself and slowly shove it over.

I suspect for that kind of thing, the DM would just say "you topple it" rather than resorting to a formal mechanic.

 

[drquestion]

I suspect for that kind of thing, the DM would just say "you topple it" rather than resorting to a formal mechanic.

Is it wrong that, for strength checks, it seems perversely fun to me to make the player role all 10 or whatever times before he succeeds?

 

[Jhulae]

Is it wrong that, for strength checks, it seems perversely fun to me to make the player role all 10 or whatever times before he succeeds?

For me, it just seems to waste time we could be doing something more productive. (Our group only meets every other week and we only get about 4-5 hours of game time in, so every bit is fairly precious.)

Either someone *will* have the strength to topple it or they *won't*. I honestly feel the DM should just describe how it falls or say it can't be budged and move on.

 

[frankthedm]

Either someone *will* have the strength to topple it or they *won't*. I honestly feel the DM should just describe how it falls or say it can't be budged and move on.

If the danged fool want to keep trying untill the character gets a hernia, that's why I am a fan of critcal failures.