Seeing the argument that "10% Hear Noise" equates to "10% chance to hear anything" reinforces my belief that 3e ruined D&D, most of all with its skill system. Instead of relying on common sense, everything was reduced to a skill check.
The skill system certainly had its issues.
Want to hear if orcs are behind the door? Roll a Listen check.
I think Neonchameleon covered this: hearing people talk behind a door is DC 5, so someone with a +0 modifier and 0 ranks will succeed on a 5 or higher, so they'll make the check 80% of the time. If they are trained (like a thief might well be), they'll always succeed. So, something simple like hearing people talking isn't really an issue (though Listen has other issues -like understanding the people talking).
Want to follow Bigfoot's tracks? Roll Survival (but only if you have the Track feat).
The Track feat is required to find tracks of DCs higher than 10. So, a large creature, like Bigfoot, would be DC 9 in soft ground ("any surface soft enough to yield to pressure, but firmer than wet mud or fresh snow, in which a creature leaves frequent but shallow footprints").
Additionally, the 3.5 DMG (page 30) talks about circumstance modifiers: "Circumstances that make the task easier, such as a friendly audience or helpful environmental conditions, decrease the DC." So, if you rule that since Bigfoot is particularly heavy, you might lower the DC. It talks about giving swings of 2 to 20, so even if you gave a 4 DC decrease (2 for Bigfoot's weight, and 2 for his distinctive giant foot), the DC to track him becomes 5, which you can do even on firm ground ("most normal outdoor surfaces [such as lawns, fields, woods, and the like]").
Want to see if you can play a tune? Roll Perform.
Well, Perform DC 10 (which you can take without rolling) is a "Routine Performance" and thus probably is good enough for playing a tune with no particular talent.
Also, on page 62 of the 3.5 PHB, there's a sidebar at the bottom called "Character Skills". It says: "Your character may have solid familiarity with many skills, without having the actual training that grants skill ranks. Knowing how to strum a few chords on a lute or clamber over a low fence doesn't really mean you have ranks in Perform or Climb."
It goes on to say: "remember that no every use of a skill requires a skill check.
Performing routine tasks in normal situations is generally so easy that no check is required. And when a check might be called for, the DC of most mundane tasks rarely exceeds 10, let alone 15. In day-to-day life, when you don't have enemies breathing down your neck and your life depending on success, you can take your time and do things right -making it easy, even without any ranks in the requisite skill, to succeed."
Such a silly, stupid system. The skill system should be used in two ways: to gauge how well you do something and to determine if you can do something extraordinary.
That's what skills in 3e were about; the last paragraph of the sidebar: "You're always welcome to assume that your character is familiar with -even good at, as far as everyday tasks go- many skills beyond those for which you actually gain ranks.
The skills you buy ranks in, however, are those with which you have truly heroic potential."
The point of skills in 3.5
was to determine how well you do something (ignoring most mundane or everyday tasks, unless you're being threatened), and to determine if you can do something heroic (or, in your words, extraordinary). You may not like its execution, but perhaps you didn't know that following common sense and not rolling on easy stuff is actually normal and assumed for the game, not actually houseruling or fixing it.
I'm not trying to change your mind on 3.X's skill system -it has it's problems, for sure. And, I'm sure you see more problems with it than I do (even if I had to rip whole skills out and revise the rest). That's fine; but, I don't believe it's quite as bad as you made it out to be in your post. But hey, I'll agree to disagree, if you want to. As always, play what you like
