Taking 10 on opposed checks

[Creamsteak]

Relevant SRD quote:

Taking 10: When your character is not being threatened or distracted, you may choose to take 10. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill check, calculate your result as if you had rolled a 10. For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful. Distractions or threats (such as combat) make it impossible for a character to take 10. In most cases, taking 10 is purely a safety measure —you know (or expect) that an average roll will succeed but fear that a poor roll might fail, so you elect to settle for the average roll (a 10). Taking 10 is especially useful in situations where a particularly high roll wouldn’t help.

First question, is the word "threatened" here being used as per the players handbook definition of the word threaten?

Relevant PHB quote:

Threaten: To be able to attack in melee without moving from your current space. A creature typically threatens all squares within its natural reach, even when it is not its turn to take an action.

Second question, can you take 10 on opposed checks? I bring this up because it sounds, in certain fairly rare circumstances, to throw off probability.

If the skill that sets the DC (hide) is 11 greater than the skill that hits the DC (spot), the spotter has an 11.25% chance of success. If the person that sets the DC takes 10, the spotter has a 0% chance of success.

If the skill that hits the DC (spot) is 10 greater than the skill that hits the DC (hide), the spotter has an 88.75% chance of success. If the person that hits the DC takes 10, the spotter has a 100% chance of success.

Also, I could have done the math incorrectly, that is possible.

 

[Allanon]

Relevant SRD quote:


First question, is the word "threatened" here being used as per the players handbook definition of the word threaten?

Relevant PHB quote:


Second question, can you take 10 on opposed checks? I bring this up because it sounds, in certain fairly rare circumstances, to throw off probability.

If the skill that sets the DC (hide) is 11 greater than the skill that attempts to hit the DC (spot), I have a 100% chance of success with take 10. If both sides roll, I only have a 91% chance of success.

If the skill that attempts to hit the DC (spot) is 10 greater than the skill that sets the DC (hide), I have a 100% chance of success with take 10. If both sides roll, I only have a 88.75% chance of success.

Also, I could have done the math incorrectly, that is possible.

Personally taking 10 fall completely under my (DM) jurisdiction. The short version for me is that if there is pressure (about to die, being attacked, having seconds to spare, everyone's fate hanging in the balance kind of stuff) one cannot take 10. As long as that does not apply taking 10 or even 20 is mostly always possible for every skill.

The take 10 rule only applies when a player has at least a +5 bonus in the skill. And the take 20 rule only when a player as at least one rank in the relevant skill.

My players find this fair and it has increased the use of take 10 (and thus streamlined play) in my game. Our rogue especially has found that he's much more usefull with this rule. Ofcourse their always free to just throw and I'm always free to make them throw if I find the situation such that taking 10 would take away from the tension or game experience.

 

[dcollins]

First question: No. You'll see that where it says "threats (such as combat)" is saying something quite a bit broader then just being within melee range.

Second question: Sort of. There's nothing specifically that prevents that. However, for rolls such as Spot and Listen, under standard reactive usage (#1 of 2 ways of using the skills), those are rolls that the PC shouldn't even be aware of (are listed in the DMG as rollable by the DM in secret), and presumption has always been that if the roll is secret or out of PC control, you don't get to decide to Take 10.

If the player then takes a proactive action for something he missed (#2 of 2 ways to use the skills), then Take 10 would more clearly be appropriate. Assuming the distraction-or-threat issue isn't in play, which is itself fairly likely.

 

[Creamsteak]

First question: No. You'll see that where it says "threats (such as combat)" is saying something quite a bit broader then just being within melee range.

I agree with you there. I think that most situations where you have two characters opposing each other would qualify as a "threat", bluff vs. sense motive, hide vs. spot, or move silently vs. listen for instance.

Second question: Sort of. There's nothing specifically that prevents that. However, for rolls such as Spot and Listen, under standard reactive usage (#1 of 2 ways of using the skills), those are rolls that the PC shouldn't even be aware of (are listed in the DMG as rollable by the DM in secret), and presumption has always been that if the roll is secret or out of PC control, you don't get to decide to Take 10.

If the player then takes a proactive action for something he missed (#2 of 2 ways to use the skills), then Take 10 would more clearly be appropriate. Assuming the distraction-or-threat issue isn't in play, which is itself fairly likely.

That makes sense, but it also doesn't help me out a whole lot. I was thinking more along the lines that opposed checks (so long as they go opposed) are considered "threats" for the purpose of take 10. Either works I guess.

 

[Li Shenron]

Good question... I think it may be a different matter if only one of the 2 or otherwise both take 10.

If both take 10, the one with best modifier automatically wins, which takes random completely out of the discussion, and this is something that I personally don't like, at least in some opposed checks. Something similar can happen also if only one party takes 10 and that makes it an automatic success/failure.

At the same time, I think if one party isn't aware of the other (such as a Listen check against someone Moving Silently) it makes sense to take 10 in Listen: he's not even aware of the other yet, how can he be "distracted"? But the other who moves silently may or may not know that someone can casually hear...

 

[Thanee]

Well, you can Take 10, if your use of the skill falls within the limits described under Take 10.

Hide is perfectly viable as a skill to Take 10 with. And if your skill modifier is 11 higher than the observer's Spot modifier, then you deserve not to be seen, if you had the calm to use your ability in a routine fashion.

That's what Take 10 is all about, it allows you to succeed automatically at routine tasks (like hiding from someone who is not very perceptive).

If it goes more like... "You hear footsteps, someone will soon emerge from around the corner" "Ok, I quickly hide somewhere... behind the barrels maybe?" then you cannot Take 10 with Hide, for example.

It's highly situational...

Bye
Thanee

 

[Creamsteak]

At the same time, I think if one party isn't aware of the other (such as a Listen check against someone Moving Silently) it makes sense to take 10 in Listen: he's not even aware of the other yet, how can he be "distracted"? But the other who moves silently may or may not know that someone can casually hear...

That would make sense to me as well.

(like hiding from someone who is not very perceptive)

Not necessarily "not very perceptive", just significantly less perceptive. 10 points difference, while a lot, could be the difference between a +30 spot and a +41 modifier (a +1 hide with invisibility). Normally, the spotter has an 11.25% chance of being able to see the invisible character (heh...). Take 10 bypasses this entirely for the hiding person.

That's what Take 10 is all about, it allows you to succeed automatically at routine tasks (like hiding from someone who is not very perceptive).

If it goes more like... "You hear footsteps, someone will soon emerge from around the corner" "Ok, I quickly hide somewhere... behind the barrels maybe?" then you cannot Take 10 with Hide, for example.

It's highly situational...

That also makes sense to me. Allowing someone to take 10 to set the DC before anyone makes a check to match it (such as hiding for an ambush, or writing out a suitable forgery with false information before anyone reads it) seems applicable. But hiding while, for instance, walking through an enemies camp, I can't see it being done. It really hinges on what a "threat" or "distraction" is though.

 

[Patlin]

That also makes sense to me. Allowing someone to take 10 to set the DC before anyone makes a check to match it (such as hiding for an ambush, or writing out a suitable forgery with false information before anyone reads it) seems applicable. But hiding while, for instance, walking through an enemies camp, I can't see it being done. It really hinges on what a "threat" or "distraction" is though.

I also agree with Thanee. (No surprise to Creamsteak, I suppose, as my character's actions spawned the question.) As to hiding while walking through an enemies camp, though, I think this is possible under the right circumstances.

I think you are "not threatened" if the enemy doesn't know you or your allies are arround. If they hear you, but fail to locate you, and are alerted to danger you become threatened. If they see one of your buddies, even if combat doesn't immediately start, that will heighten their state of alert and you will become threatened.

Frequently, whether a rule feels right depends on how sucessfull you feel it should be. Stealth is a very expensive proposition in D&D. Since a failure in stealth can easilly result in a dead scout, anyone who intends to be stealthy will want to max out both hide and move silently. You'll want to be good at spot and listen, too, in my opinion, as half of staying hidden is noticing the other guy before he notices you. That's four skills to throw skill points into! If you put all of that effort into it, a guard that's going to catch you ought to have some significant investment in spot and/or listen to pull it off. And that's not even taking into account scent, blindsight, or tremorsense all of which can drastically reduce or eliminate the effectiveness of all your hard work! Picture the tombstone of an unlucky rogue: "Scouted ahead of party -- found Dragon. R.I.P." I don't have any problem with a stealthy character being able to reliably get past enemies if he has a significant lead in stealth over observation.

 

[Creamsteak]

My big "what if" about it is the circumstances where you negate someone elses very high roll. I guess it's not a problem so long as there are mitigating circumstances and modifiers as such.

 

[iwatt]

For spot and Listen v/s Hide and Move silently i use the following:

Sam the spotter (+10) v/s Hank the hider (+2)

both take 10. That means that at 80' (-8 to spot) they're tied. That's when I start rolling the dice. Usually serves to avoid cumbersome rolls.

sam the spotter (+10) vs Harry the Halfling (+20)
In the case when Harry has a muche better modifier than Sam, I let him close to 30' (DnD distance) before having them roll.

works all right for me, avoids boring rolls (OK...you're 180' away, roll your hide).