Take 20 on Aid Another?

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Also, a 1 is not a "critical failure" on a skill check.

 

[kitcik]

Or, rather, review the rules on taking 20. At the end of a Take 20 Aid Another attempt* (which takes 20 times as long as a single Aid Another attempt), you are treated as having rolled a 20 on your check to Aid Another.

I agree.

If you are attempting to do something which takes a standard action, it therefore takes 20 rounds - 2 minutes - to Take 20 on that thing.

And Take 20 does not assume any rolling. Rather, it assumes "fail, fail, fail, fail, fail, ..., fail, result as if you had rolled a 20."

I think you are saying the exact same thing as Greenfield, just in a different way. You are saying it takes 20 rounds (same as if you rolled 20 times) and that it assumes 19 fails and one roll of 20 (Greenfield was I think trying to say the same thing, although maybe he could've said it better).

It in no way assumes that you, in practice, roll every number - elsewise, if you take 20 at something you would have succeeded at on a roll of a 1, why don't you automatically succeed after a single round?

If you would succeed on a 1, I doubt you would take 20, but that is neither here nor there. I agree - it doesn't assume you actually rolled all the other numbers - just that it takes the same time as if you did and got 19 fails and a 20.

And folks, I know statistics; let's not start waving math credentials around at each other. The 400 rolls thing is ridiculous.

Now this is where I disagree. If the main person is taking 20, and therefore is assumed to get 19 fails and a 20, and the aiding person is also taking 20 and assumed to get 19 fails and a 20, how do you know the 20's occur at the same time? Although there is no guarantee that would happen in exactly 400 rolls, the expected amount of times that the two 20's would occur simultaneously is 1 out of 400. It's not necessarily RAW, but it's certainly not ridiculous.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Now this is where I disagree. If the main person is taking 20, and therefore is assumed to get 19 fails and a 20, and the aiding person is also taking 20 and assumed to get 19 fails and a 20, how do you know the 20's occur at the same time?

... Because after 20 rounds, you both are treated as if you had rolled a 20 on your check.

If you're trying to batter down a door, and you take 20, then you'll be standing there at the door for 20 rounds taking the "Kick the door" standard action. In Round 20, we check whether a result of 20 + your Strength mod would batter down the door. In all previous rounds, you automatically failed the Strength check to break down the door.

If I'm Aiding Another on this attempt, and taking 20, then I'll be standing there at the door for 20 rounds taking the Aid Another action. In Round 20, we check whether a result of 20 + my Strength mod beats a DC of 10. If it does, then you get a +2 on your check. In all previous rounds, I automatically failed the Strength check to Aid Another on your attempt to break down the door.

We don't check whether or not the 20s occur at the "same time" because we aren't actually rolling anything. At the end of 20 rounds, we assume we both rolled 20s and proceed from there.

Again, ignoring the "can't take 20" rule from the RC (which I don't like, as a general rule).

 

[Arrowhawk]

... Because after 20 rounds, you both are treated as if you had rolled a 20 on your check..

Good luck everyone.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

What is that supposed to mean?

 

[Jimlock]

... Because after 20 rounds, you both are treated as if you had rolled a 20 on your check.

yep

If you're trying to batter down a door, and you take 20, then you'll be standing there at the door for 20 rounds taking the "Kick the door" standard action. In Round 20, we check whether a result of 20 + your Strength mod would batter down the door. In all previous rounds, you automatically failed the Strength check to break down the door.

yep

If I'm Aiding Another on this attempt, and taking 20, then I'll be standing there at the door for 20 rounds taking the Aid Another action. In Round 20, we check whether a result of 20 + my Strength mod beats a DC of 10. If it does, then you get a +2 on your check. In all previous rounds, I automatically failed the Strength check to Aid Another on your attempt to break down the door.

yep

We don't check whether or not the 20s occur at the "same time" because we aren't actually rolling anything. At the end of 20 rounds, we assume we both rolled 20s and proceed from there.

yep

Again, ignoring the "can't take 20" rule from the RC (which I don't like, as a general rule).

yep...

Although I always take RC as seriously as SRD...


No mean no disrespect to anyone, but that "take 400" theory sounds ridiculous indeed.

Taking 20
When you have plenty of time (generally 2 minutes for a skill that can normally be checked in 1 round, one full-round action, or one standard action), you are faced with no threats or distractions, and the skill being attempted carries no penalties for failure, you can take 20. In other words, eventually you will get a 20 on 1d20 if you roll enough times. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill check, just calculate your result as if you had rolled a 20.

Taking 20 means you are trying until you get it right, and it assumes that you fail many times before succeeding. Taking 20 takes twenty times as long as making a single check would take.

Since taking 20 assumes that the character will fail many times before succeeding, if you did attempt to take 20 on a skill that carries penalties for failure, your character would automatically incur those penalties before he or she could complete the task. Common “take 20” skills include Escape Artist, Open Lock, and Search.

NOWHERE does it say that it's as if you rolled 20 times. It only says that it takes twenty times as long as making a single check would take.

 

[kitcik]

Well, we'll just have to disagree on that, then. I still think that's exactly why they ultimately outlawed taking 20 on Aid Another - it's impossible to perfectly time your maximum help with the doer's maximum success.

 

[Nagol]

The probabilities are not independent of one another.

If the situation is that player A needs to roll a 22 on the d20 to succeed and come up with the idea to have a second character Aid Another, the conversation could go something like this:

John: Bob -- you help me with Aid Another and we can do this.
Bob: Sure -- oh wait, I'm really crappy at this! I need a 20 to succeed in aiding you.
John: No problem we have time.

DM: OK, Bob, Since your roll is only necessary if John rolls 20, we'll wait for him to roll a 20 then see if your Aid helps.

Bob: Why?
DM: Because John needs a 22 total. You help isn't enough unless he rolls a 20.

John: Can't I just Take 20 on the check?

DM: Yep! It takes 20 minutes instead on 1, though.
John: We have the time.

DM: OK Bob, John takes 20, roll.
Bob: 15, crap.

DM: OK Bob, John takes 20, roll.
Bob: 11, crap.

DM: OK Bob, John takes 20, roll.
Bob: 3, crap. That's a whole hour wasted! Can I take 20 too?

DM: Sure but, a Take 20 takes 20 times as long as the base time. You're rolling once every 20 minutes, so in about six and a half hours you'll be done.

Bob: But, shouldn't I be roll at the same time as John? It shouldn't take any longer!

DM: Yes, but every 20 rolls each of you will get a 20. But you getting a 20 when he gets a 15 doesn't matter and him getting a 20 when you get a 3 doesn't matter. You both need 20's at the same time. That's why I only had you roll once John got the 20 in the first place. With Take 20, John can automagically get a 20 every 20 tries, or 20 minutes. You can get a 20 every 20 tries with one try every time John succeeds so you'll get a 20 in 400 minutes.

 

[Jimlock]

it's impossible to perfectly time your maximum help with the doer's maximum success.

Sure, that logic applies to many a task.

OTOH, there are also many tasks where the main character will say to the helper:

"Hey, hold me this tightly while I do the rest."

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

The probabilities are not independent of one another.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with anything, as soon as Taking 20 enters the picture.

Either you can't Take 20 on Aid Another attempts, in which case you roll once, or you can, in which case you're treated as having rolled a 20 at the end of 20 rounds of Aiding Another.

Take 400 is silly.

DM: Yes, but every 20 rolls each of you will get a 20. But you getting a 20 when he gets a 15 doesn't matter

Except that this never happens with the Take 20 rule, because the Take 20 rule involves no rolling whatsoever. This seems to be the hang-up that the "No" crowd just can't get their heads around.

If the Take 20 rule were meant to model "Sometime in the next 20 attempts, you'll roll a 20," then wouldn't the Take 20 rule actually take 1d20 times as long as performing the action normally? If you're worried about timing, then you shouldn't assume that the "last roll" is the one in which the 20 occurs.