silentspace
First Post
Kahuna Burger said:
If the rules say something can be done, and you decide that it can't be done, then that's a nerf. None of your examples fall into that category.
Last edited:
Tracking over rock. Is it too easy?
- Thread starter Tom McCafferty
- Start date
If the rules say something can be done, and you decide that it can't be done, then that's a nerf. None of your examples fall into that category.
Kahuna Burger
First Post
silentspace said:
actually, in 3.0 the rules didn't say that you needed cover or concealment to use the hide skill, so applying the same logic I'm using on track to hide was considered a nerf by many. In 3.5 they realized that some players were so attached to the chart in the book as the be all and end all that they actually had to spell out that skills were subject to the limits of, you know, life. I don't need to wait for them to spell it out on every skill, and its not nerfing if the character abilities are still useful in other situations.
Locigal incorporation of present factors is never a nerf, IMHO and thats what I am suggesting in this example.
(in every context I've heard it used nerfing means "to make useless". Judging a tool inapproriate to a certain task doesn't make it useless, and I'm gonna have to reject your alternate defintion, especially as I am also inclined to allow the use of track in situations which I deem realistic but aren't explicitly spelled out in the rules.)
Kahuna Burger
I think this whole thing is somewhat funny. As was quoted by Diirk,Kahuna Burger said:
So people are arguing that tracking across this well traveled coridor is much more difficult than tracking through a stream which is also stated as DC 20? I personally don't have any skill in tracking. Therefore, a DC of 20 would make it impossible for me. Actually I would have a 5% chance, but since it isn't a class skill I can't track DC's of greater than 10. Therefore I wouldn't even try. However, someone who has trained themselves in tracking... even a 1st level ranger (who is already superior to the average person AND took some training in tracking) should have a good possibility of doing so. Just because something is impossible for us to do with no training in a skill does not mean that it really is as difficult as we imagine.
Rock climbing is a good example. If I didn't see people actually climb some surfaces, I would say to myself that it was about impossible. However, with even just a little time in training for that skill, amazing things become possible. Unfortunately, tracking has never been a part of the american culture so few people can even watch what can be done when someone is trained in tracking.
It is folly to adjust DC based on our assumptions over something that we have no experience or knowledge.
silentspace
First Post
Kahuna Burger said:
Sorry, I have to disagree. Haste was nerfed, for example. Haste was not made useless. It was weakened. Also, 'nerf' doesn't always have a negative connotation. Perhaps you're giving it a negative connotation because you think you know better then the game designers. (And there's nothing wrong with thinking that - we all have problems with various aspects of the rules.)
So I don't think I have an alternate definition of nerf, but rather you do.
BTW, I also disagree with your assessment of 3.0 Hide. Some people may have chosen to interpret it differently, but the 3.0 PHB says Hide is used to "sink back into the shadows," etc. It also says "If people are observing you... you can't hide. You can run around a corner... so that you're out of sight and then hide..." Some people choose to read things in a way that are most beneficial to them, but to most dispassionate observers the text was pretty clear.
Plane Sailing
Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
Kahuna Burger said:
But a fighter would be nerfed if at the very moment when his ability to hit something with a sword might be useful, the PC says "aha, but I've been training for just such a moment" and the DM says "Nah, AC20 is too easy. I'm going to put its AC up to 30 because that is more realistic"
Anyone with tracking skill has made a greater investment in a particular thing than a rogue and his hiding (skill only) or a fighter (gets BAB automatically), yet the number of occasions when it comes into play is miniscule in comparison to those.
For a DM to say "no, that's too easy" is devaluing the PCs choices and development.
It is not much different in kind to a cleric saying "I'll commune to find out which door he went through" and the the DM saying "Nah, that's too easy. Commune won't answer that question".
When PC's get to certain levels, certain tasks become easier for them. The DM needs to plan for this, and allow (or even require) the use of these facilities, giving the PC's an opportunity to shine.
I guess that all depends, you could take a 20 and automatically succeed. Sure it will take some time, but you really have no chance of failure. But even if you rule that it is impossible to take 20 (debateable, but maybe I just missed something somewhere about that, not important) Then anyone who has taken the feat and has some ranks in survival can track just about anyone just about anywhere from level 1 on.
Level 1, 4 ranks, +2 from wisdom, track feat. +6 to your check, retry outdoors every hour or indoors every 10 minutes. You cannot fail at this check given enough time. Each time you have a 35% chance of succeeding. At level 2 you get +5 ranks, +4 synergy, +2 wisdom, maybe even a +1 item. That is a +12, you could track a flea across that stone floor 4 days after it made its way across.
They really should toss in a list of modifiers onto this skill. It desperately, desperately needs them. After all, according to the last poster it is folly for us to think about such things, so maybe they could get people with actual skill in this area to help a little
I would have no problem with an avid d&d gamer who knows so many ins and outs of tracking that they would be considered godly to give a few hints here and there, anyone know of anyone like that?
I mean come on, there isnt even a modifier for, 'the area you are tracking over was destroyed by ____' or 'for every X number of people who have trampled all over the tracks you get this penalty'
Thinking of the building I am currently in, if someone walked through the building in a wandering course and 10 minutes later I had a full survice forensics team speed the area then there is a very small, but possible, possibility of being able to track at lease some of their movements. By a lot of very technical tricks and incredibly dedicated people. That sort of skill would be represented by many, many ranks, good stats, and synergy. Plus some competence modifiers.
For the river bed example, in that situation there are literally hundreds of different things that might be slightly out of place for a natural setting. Nature has a certain order to it, though it isnt apparent to everyone.
If you just walked into someones house and tried to trace their movements in the last half hour good luck. Humans tend not to have any such order, how do you know that the magazine on the table was half an inch to the left when they entered? Just give me some ideas of what could someone possibly even notice as being different in the stone floor hallway example, something!
Level 1, 4 ranks, +2 from wisdom, track feat. +6 to your check, retry outdoors every hour or indoors every 10 minutes. You cannot fail at this check given enough time. Each time you have a 35% chance of succeeding. At level 2 you get +5 ranks, +4 synergy, +2 wisdom, maybe even a +1 item. That is a +12, you could track a flea across that stone floor 4 days after it made its way across.
They really should toss in a list of modifiers onto this skill. It desperately, desperately needs them. After all, according to the last poster it is folly for us to think about such things, so maybe they could get people with actual skill in this area to help a little
I would have no problem with an avid d&d gamer who knows so many ins and outs of tracking that they would be considered godly to give a few hints here and there, anyone know of anyone like that?I mean come on, there isnt even a modifier for, 'the area you are tracking over was destroyed by ____' or 'for every X number of people who have trampled all over the tracks you get this penalty'
Thinking of the building I am currently in, if someone walked through the building in a wandering course and 10 minutes later I had a full survice forensics team speed the area then there is a very small, but possible, possibility of being able to track at lease some of their movements. By a lot of very technical tricks and incredibly dedicated people. That sort of skill would be represented by many, many ranks, good stats, and synergy. Plus some competence modifiers.
For the river bed example, in that situation there are literally hundreds of different things that might be slightly out of place for a natural setting. Nature has a certain order to it, though it isnt apparent to everyone.
If you just walked into someones house and tried to trace their movements in the last half hour good luck. Humans tend not to have any such order, how do you know that the magazine on the table was half an inch to the left when they entered? Just give me some ideas of what could someone possibly even notice as being different in the stone floor hallway example, something!
hey plane,
Your fighter example is not quite correct. For a direct comparison it would be something like, 'anyone in no armor has ac 10, anyone in wooden/leather armor has ac 15 and anyone in metal armor has ac 20' That would be the same thing as we have for track right now. It doesnt matter how hard the particular setting might make it to track, all that matters is just the base layout. Is it stone or mud? For your fighter it is the same, are they wearing leather or metal?
For a dm they would say, 'well, this guy is wearing armor X, with dex modifier Y, and other bonuses Z as appropriate to the creatures amount of wealth and equipment.' Completely different scenarios
Certain tasks do become easier as you level up, that is true. But in this case they start out dead easy and then go into triviality within a few levels. No matter how hard a certain situation should be with various circumstancial modifiers, as they are not listed in an appropriate place.
A flat dc 20 is the same as the above example with the fighter and type armor, plus it is a reason many people change tumble, tumble doesnt care how skilled your oppoenent is.
Your fighter example is not quite correct. For a direct comparison it would be something like, 'anyone in no armor has ac 10, anyone in wooden/leather armor has ac 15 and anyone in metal armor has ac 20' That would be the same thing as we have for track right now. It doesnt matter how hard the particular setting might make it to track, all that matters is just the base layout. Is it stone or mud? For your fighter it is the same, are they wearing leather or metal?
For a dm they would say, 'well, this guy is wearing armor X, with dex modifier Y, and other bonuses Z as appropriate to the creatures amount of wealth and equipment.' Completely different scenarios
Certain tasks do become easier as you level up, that is true. But in this case they start out dead easy and then go into triviality within a few levels. No matter how hard a certain situation should be with various circumstancial modifiers, as they are not listed in an appropriate place.
A flat dc 20 is the same as the above example with the fighter and type armor, plus it is a reason many people change tumble, tumble doesnt care how skilled your oppoenent is.
MerakSpielman
First Post
From what I understand, tracking is more of an intuitive art than an exact science. You can't teach a computer to do it, because it relies heavily on judgement calls on the part of the tracker to be inside the head of the person being tracked.
That is, you might not be following physical evidence much of the time. You might be putting yourself in the position of the person who you're following and trying to make the same decisions they would. Then, if possible, you search for evidence that you might be right. If there's no evidence, you go with your gut. That's why you get a wisdom modifier, not an intelligence modifier.
The situation changes drastically if the person you're following knows the terrain (be it dungeon or not) better than you - or if they know it perfectly and you don't know it at all.
That is, you might not be following physical evidence much of the time. You might be putting yourself in the position of the person who you're following and trying to make the same decisions they would. Then, if possible, you search for evidence that you might be right. If there's no evidence, you go with your gut. That's why you get a wisdom modifier, not an intelligence modifier.
The situation changes drastically if the person you're following knows the terrain (be it dungeon or not) better than you - or if they know it perfectly and you don't know it at all.
MerakSpielman
First Post
Part of the problem with Track is you can't get false positives. A tracker who has made a poor decision or misread a track could end up going the wrong way for quite some distance before they realize their mistake. Or maybe backtracking and re-checking is included in the time it takes.
RigaMortus
Explorer
Kahuna Burger said:
They didn't portray it as a psychic ability at all. They showed Aragorn bending down and picking up the hobbits belt, then studying. Then they show him finding foot prints and indentations in the ground. And they show him following those marks towards Fangorn forest. To say it seemed like a psychic ability would mean he was just standing there concentrating and envisioning what happened.
If it's the split screen thing that confused you, they only showed that to show Aragorn was right. He didn't actually see or picture the hobbits escaping, they just showed that for the audiences benefit.
Similar Threads
