Taking 20, Take 10

[irdeggman]

Radmod,

I will disagree with many of your presumptions:

Presume that a 20 does eventually succeed (since technically the above rule is wrong if even a 20 would not succeed, e.g. a +5 Spot vs. a DC 30 hide check).

Yes, you will auto-fail, but you would also auto-succeed. For a spot check, this means you will fail to notice until you eventually see. So if someone is hiding from you, and a roll of 20 will allow you to see them, then if you look at that location for a full two minutes you will eventually see them even though most of the time you just don't see them. Now if they are aiming at you with a ranged weapon then it's up to your DM to decide if you see them before they surprise you. (I usually give a percentage chance depending on how long it takes them to fire, e.g. if they don't fire at you for five rounds then you get a 25% chance to not be surprised.)

Autofail is autofail (which means as atated in the rules you would incur any penalties associated with failure).

The rules do not say you auto-succeed only that you "get it right" (i.e., the best you can do - which might still not be enough). Rolling a nat 20 on a skill check does not mean autosucceed (only on saving throws and attack rolls - many people miss this one), same with a nat 1 (it doesn't mean you autofail except on saving throws and attack rollls)

Quote:
If you fail to spot someone Hiding then they are invisible to you (Rules Compendium pg 92).

No an invisible creature gets a +20 on his Hide check).

No, for two reasons.
1) The RC says:
"If you're successfully hidden ... that creature is treated as flat-footed with respect to you. That creature treats you as if you were invisible."
This is all based on the 'if' statement. If you fail to see something then the hidden creature gets to treat you as if it were invisible. Likewise, you are not 'invisible' but 'treated' as invisible, which is discretionary. I'm 101% sure what they intended is simply for the purposes of things like combat or sneak attack. Not for the purposes of making another spot (the +20).
2) While taking 20 is treated as if it were rolling 20 times in 20 rounds, it is still a single check: "Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill check, just calculate your result as if you had rolled a 20."

While Take 20 does say if the check "carries no penalties for failure", quite frankly, I can't see any competent DM playing it any other way. The idea that just because you didn't see something the first time means that it becomes invisible to later checks is ludicrous. (Unless we're talking about car keys!)

If you fail to see someone who is attempting to hide from you - they are invisible to you (which means exactly what it says - it even references the section in the Rules Compendium on what invisible means).

The penalty (to the spotter) for this is that the creature attempting to hide gains a +20 on his hide checks - hence your take 20 now has a higher DC to meet than it did before - different circumstance.

The person attempting to hid never makes multople hide checks. If mutiple people are attempting to spot him he gets different bonuses/penalties based on each "spotter" (any cover, distance, etc.)

So if he is invisible to you he gets a +20 on his Hide check. Per the Rules Compendium (pg 76) if you beat that DC then you have a "hunch" that something is there (see my earlier interpretation of Spot and Search for intentional similarities) but can't see it or target it accurately with an attack.. . .A spot check that beats the DC by 20 pinpoints the invisible target's location, but that target still benefits from total concealment.

Quote:
Note that the normal Spot versus Hide checks is reflexive and no action. If retrying or "actively" attempting to Spot it is a move action.

I've never quite liked this part because, technically, it means if all you do is try to spot something then you can take 20 in a minute by making the equivalent of double spot checks a round (e.g. a double move).

How to you get "double-move" out of taking 20 times as long?


Which is why, as it is a reflexive roll that the DM calls for - I would never allow someone to take 20. YOu can only take 20 on skill check you are attempting to get right - to me that reads actively using the skill.

 

[radmod]

How to you get "double-move" out of taking 20 times as long?

Only have time for a quickie:
I'm sorry, that's not what I meant to imply. What I meant was that if 'retrying' a spot is a move action, then a person could make two retries a round as a double move. So taking 20 retries would be 10 rounds of double moves.

 

[irdeggman]

Some more information on taking 20 on a Spot check.

From the FAQ (or Sage Advice) {yes I know a lot of people do not agree with the FAQ and auto-dismiss it but it still exists as a source of "official" information)

See the bolded text pertaining to "opposed rolls".

How can I tell whether or not I can take 20 on a check,
and what constitutes “failure” on a check?

Taking 20 is simply a time-saving short-cut that avoids
requiring a player to roll and roll until he gets a 20 on a check
that everyone knows he’ll simply retry until he either succeeds
or is convinced he can’t.

Ultimately, whether or not you can take 20 relies on only
three criteria:

• The check allows you to try again. Each skill has a “Try
Again” entry that lists whether you can attempt the same task
again. If you can’t retry the task, you can’t take 20 (since
taking 20 involves retrying the task). You can’t retry a
Decipher Script check, so taking 20 is out of the question.

• Failure does not carry an inherent penalty (that is, a
consequence). If something bad happens when you fail a check,
you can’t take 20, since the DM needs to know exactly when or
how often failure occurs. When you’re halfway up a wall and
fail a Climb check, you might fall and take damage. That’s an
inherent consequence, so you can’t normally take 20 on Climb
checks.

• You have available time equal to making the check 20
times. If you have only 1 minute until the walls of the room
slide together and crush you, you obviously can’t take 20 on a
Search check to find the hidden off switch (since that takes 20
rounds).

There’s no perfect list of which checks do or don’t allow
taking 20. For example, you can retry Spot checks, and it
doesn’t seem like a failed Spot check carries any inherent
consequence. Does that mean you can take 20 on Spot checks
when keeping watch for monsters sneaking up on your
campsite?

Well, yes and no. If you stare at the same sight for 2
minutes, you can absolutely take 20 on a Spot check to get a
really good look at it. But if an assassin is sneaking through the
shadows toward you, he’s probably not there for that whole 2
minutes. Thus, you couldn’t take 20, since you don’t actually
have available time equal to making the check 20 times against
that enemy. You’d have to roll your Spot check normally
(opposed by the assassin’s Hide check) to notice the enemy.

Similarly, if a check’s success or failure depends on
another character’s opposed roll, both sides have to roll when
that opposition occurs—you can’t take 20 and “save up” the
maximum result. If you hide in the bushes to attack a group of
orcs that will walk by later, you can’t take 20 on the Hide
check, since the success or failure of your Hide check isn’t
resolved until the orcs make their Spot checks. You can’t take
20 on a Use Rope check to tie someone up, since you don’t
really know how successful you’ve been until that enemy tries
to struggle free.

If you’re having trouble with the concept, try ignoring it
and instead allow characters to retry failed skill checks until
they roll 20. You’ll soon recognize what checks are appropriate
for taking 20—they’re the ones during which everyone sits
around bored while one player rolls and rolls and rolls.

Imagine a game without the “take 20” rule:
• After defeating hordes of monsters, the PCs stand before a
strong wooden door blocking entry to the treasure room. The
break DC is 23, which the 20-Strength Regdar shouldn’t have
too much trouble getting eventually. The DM knows that
there’s nothing left in the dungeon to harm the characters, so
time (and noise) isn’t an issue. However, everyone has to sit
around and wait until Regdar’s player rolls an 18 or better on
the d20.
• Once inside, the PCs discover a locked chest. Wary of a
trap, Lidda’s player rolls a 16 on her Search check. She finds
nothing, but that doesn’t allay her suspicion, so she wants to
keep rolling her Search check until she gets a 20. (She might as
well, since the party has plenty of time and nothing bad
happens to her if she fails the Search check.) If she’s lucky, this
takes only a few rolls, but we’ve all played with players who
couldn’t roll a 20 with a hundred tries.
• After finally determining that the chest seems safe, Lidda
now turns to the lock. Her first Open Lock check garners a d20
roll of 11, which fails to open the lock even with her prodigious
+14 modifier. Again, the party has plenty of time, so she tries
again but rolls a 6. The DM knows the DC 30 lock is well
within Lidda’s ability to unlock, but has to wait until she rolls a
16 or better on the d20. Meanwhile, the rest of the players are
wandering off to check what’s on TV.

In the Sage’s experience, over 90% of all “take 20” checks
are made for one of the following four reasons. Even if you
only limit yourself to these few examples, you’ll save valuable
game time:
Strength checks to open doors
Listen checks at closed doors
Open Lock checks
Search checks