Take 20 on Open Lock?

[HeavyG]

Re: Re: Re: Re: re

We always assume that when you make certain skill checks (such as Search or Hide) you are always trying your BEST at it. So we generally do not allow retries of any kind, because it doesn't make any sense to do so. This is why the DM usually rolls for the player, behind the screen. You never know if you rolled that 1 or 20.

If you are searching a 5x5 square and don't find what you are looking for, it could be because you didn't roll high enough OR because there really isn't anything there to find. In either case, why would you reroll? You did your BEST at Searching, so it makes no sense to reroll, unless you allow metagaming (I rolled low, therefore I will keep rolling until I get high enough that I am satisfied with the roll).

Obviously, rolling a 20 means you have given it your best shot. It's exactly what the dice roll is there for.

Or, another way to look at it is that you have a better chance of finding something if you search for 2 minutes than if you search for 6 seconds.

However, I don't like that this makes success impossible or certain, but I don't really have a solution for that.

Don't know of any party that'd want to drag you around with them...

Ha ! It's funny because Hong is continually flaming people !

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: re

Obviously, rolling a 20 means you have given it your best shot. It's exactly what the dice roll is there for.

Or, another way to look at it is that you have a better chance of finding something if you search for 2 minutes than if you search for 6 seconds.

However, I don't like that this makes success impossible or certain, but I don't really have a solution for that.

The problem here isn't with the take 20 mechanic. After all, you could just have the PC roll the dice until they got a 20, and you'd have the same result. The problem is with how skill check results tend to be binary in nature: either you succeed (beat the DC) or you fail. A lot of times, a more graduated type of response would make more sense.

Something like the following, for instance:
- Beat DC: complete success
- Fail by 5 or less: partial success
- Fail by 10 or less: partial failure
- Fail by more than 10: complete failure

Pinning down the exact numbers is an exercise for another day, as is defining complete/partial success/failure for each skill.

Ha ! It's funny because Hong is continually flaming people !

I do not, you horrible excuse for a narcotics-addled poncing turlingdrome.

 

[Coredump]

Celt

The way I look at it, the penalty for failing to find a trap is not having the chance to disarm it or bypass it. If a person can't find the trap, then they are guaranteed to set it off, and I view this as a penalty.

Not quite. Not finding the trap isn't a *penalty*, it just isn't a *benefit*. The question is was it worse to try and fail, or the same as not trying? ie. try and jump a cliff; try and fail is worse than not trying. *that* is a penalty.
You are *not* guaranteed to set off a trap by not finding it, you don't take damage from not finding it, you could just turn around and go home. Same as if you never tried to find it.
To paraphrase Hong: Is there anything stopping them from rolling over and over regardless of the results? If not, they can take 20.

Riga

We always assume that when you make certain skill checks (such as Search or Hide) you are always trying your BEST at it. So we generally do not allow retries of any kind, because it doesn't make any sense to do so. This is why the DM usually rolls for the player, behind the screen. You never know if you rolled that 1 or 20.

Haven't you ever lost something? I was looking for a computer game in my office, and I was trying my best. But I didn't find it; so I started looking again, and again. I even came back later and looked again. Apparently I finally rolled high enough, since I found it. Athletes/craftsmen/gameplayers/writers/etc. are always trying their 'best'; yet sometimes they perform better than other times.

If you are searching a 5x5 square and don't find what you are looking for, it could be because you didn't roll high enough OR because there really isn't anything there to find. In either case, why would you reroll? You did your BEST at Searching, so it makes no sense to reroll, unless you allow metagaming (I rolled low, therefore I will keep rolling until I get high enough that I am satisfied with the roll).

So, when you look for your keys, you only spend 6 seconds? (per 5' square of room) And if you don't find them, you assume you did your 'best' and stop?
Now, I agree; to save from metagaming, the DM could roll behind a screen each time. The player would never know why he didn't find anything.
And if the player said "I 'know' something is here, I keep looking until I find it" (ie role-play speak for 'take 20') then the DM says "Well, you have been searching for 15-20 minutes, and you find nada.... what'cha wanna do now?"

 

[Destan]

Dagnabit, Coredump, that's a good line of reasoning you got there. Wish it were made that clear in the PHB.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Dagnabit, Coredump, that's a good line of reasoning you got there. Wish it were made that clear in the PHB.

Hey...! Didn't I say the same thing half a page back?

-Hyp.

 

[Destan]

Yah, Hyp, I suppose you did. But I'm always thanking you. I need to spread the love.

 

[Celtavian]

Re: Re: re

From a GM standpoint, Take 10 and Take 20 are ways to speed up the process. If the players are just going to keep trying until they get it right, you might as well allow them to take 20.

Also remember just how long take 20 requires. It is extremely likely that they will not always have *time* enough to take 20. If the characters are under any sort of time pressure (including needing to hurry out before the reenforcements come), they aren't going to take 20 on a search.

Yes, but if you are a GM who can act well, then the players will most like Search for traps 2 or 3 times, and then they will probably set it off.

I usually allow take 20 if there is no chance of damage period. If my player develops the personality of an extremely paranoid thief who searches for traps maniacally on just about everything, more power to them, but searching for traps will never be a gimme in my campaign.

You can really play it either way. I prefer to not allow take 20 for trap searching because I want the Search skill to be constantly trained up. If I allowed take 20, then a thief could stop increasing his or her Search Skill around level 7 to 12, depending upon their intelligence, even earlier if they have a Lens of Detection. I don't want that to happen.

 

[Celtavian]

Re: Re: re

That's just not true - another thing people forget or ignore all the time is that Search takes 1 round/5' square. If you take 20, that means taking 2 minutes to check every square - so unless you run a game in which the players can afford to spend one hour searching a 25'x30' room, and you would actually allow such absurdly bad role-playing (Yeah, let's just take a break from our quest and take 4 hours to search this wide hallway... hope everyone brought lots of torches!) then it's not a problem, unless the traps are always in obvious places.

People don't usually check a whole room for traps, though that could happen. Usually the area checked for traps is relatively small like a door or chest.

To be quite honest, as a DM you are not going to watch the clock for the entire time they search. It will all be done in an abstract manner that opens up the possibility of extremely boring gameplay from a story standpoint.

"The party spends 4 hours searching this large room. They find a trap on the altar, a secret door, yada, yada, yada. Lets go to the next room guys, that one is the main temple it will take Joe here at least 12 hours to search every square inch of it." Not gonna play it that way, because 12 hours of game time, depending on the adversaries in the room, is about 5 or 10 minutes of sitting at the table at best. They are moving at the rate of 1 to 5 rooms a day depending on the size and whether they search each Hallway as well.

 

[Celtavian]

Celt
Not quite. Not finding the trap isn't a *penalty*, it just isn't a *benefit*. The question is was it worse to try and fail, or the same as not trying? ie. try and jump a cliff; try and fail is worse than not trying. *that* is a penalty.
You are *not* guaranteed to set off a trap by not finding it, you don't take damage from not finding it, you could just turn around and go home. Same as if you never tried to find it.
To paraphrase Hong: Is there anything stopping them from rolling over and over regardless of the results? If not, they can take 20.

Riga

Your point is valid and true. As I stated, I have other reasons for not allowing Take 20 on a Search for traps roll. I feel it devalues the Search skill and too easily enables peope to find traps.

Another example of abuse like the following could happen: Player takes 1 level of rogue, maxes out his Search skill, then picks up a Lense of Detection. Now this player can find every trap save ones I make up by taking 20. I hope people rarely do this, but it is a possiblity.

The Rogue has an important job, and Search is one of the more important Rogue skills. I prefer that they are encouraged to increase this skill to its maximum possible level. I feel allowing a person to Take 20 doesn't encourage Rogues to increase their search skill, so I don't allow it. No other reason do I have for not allowing Take 20.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The Rogue has an important job, and Search is one of the more important Rogue skills.

I don't have a problem with people finding traps if they take the time to look for them.

"I check the chest. Do I think it's trapped?"
"No."
"No poison needles or anything?"
"No."
"So looking through my Lens of Detection around the lock, there are definitely no holes for needles?"
"No holes."
"I look really, really hard."
"Yup."
"Okay, I open the lock."
"A needle shoots out of a little hole and stabs you. Make a Fort Save."

Meh. Don't like it.

But once they know it's there, they have to disable it. And on that, you can't Take 20...

-Hyp.