What skills can you take 10 or 20 on?

[billd91]

I believe the idea here was that somewas was hiding before an observer was present, since you can't normally hide while being observed. Kind of like a covert ops guy settling in and camoflaging himself before the enemy shows up.

I believe this situation is best handled with a circumstance modifier.
"You show up in plenty of time and set up some camouflage. I'll give you a +4 to your hide check for that."

Ultimately, there's no way for the hiding character to know whether or not he'd be seen by the person he's hiding from prior to actually being seen. So there's really no chance of a retry until he gets his hiding down perfect.
The real crux of taking 20 is the ability to retry your task until you get it perfect. I can't see that happening with hide.

 

[Exquisite Dead Guy]

Ultimately, there's no way for the hiding character to know whether or not he'd be seen by the person he's hiding from prior to actually being seen.

"Can you see me now? Good!"

 

[moritheil]

Since taking 20 involves doing something over and over, time constraints may also prevent you from doing it.

 

[Wolfwood2]

I got into an argument hte other day about whether someone could Take 20 on a Heal check to determine how a corpse had died.

My argument was that the Heal check was essentially functioning as a Knowledge check under the cirumstances. Either you're able to make the deduction form available information or you're not.

Their argument was that by taking all the time needed, the skill user could do every possible test and examine every part of the body, for the best possible result.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Ultimately, there's no way for the hiding character to know whether or not he'd be seen by the person he's hiding from prior to actually being seen. So there's really no chance of a retry until he gets his hiding down perfect.

Let's say the rogue, under cover of a light mist, attempts to sneak near three goblins to overhear their conversation.

Do you say "Make a Hide check", or "Make three Hide checks"?

Let's say he finds his hiding spot, and listens to a few rounds of chat, and then a hobgoblin comes out of a nearby tent to speak to the goblins.

Do you say "Make another Hide check"?

-Hyp.

 

[billd91]

Let's say the rogue, under cover of a light mist, attempts to sneak near three goblins to overhear their conversation.

Do you say "Make a Hide check", or "Make three Hide checks"?

Let's say he finds his hiding spot, and listens to a few rounds of chat, and then a hobgoblin comes out of a nearby tent to speak to the goblins.

Do you say "Make another Hide check"?

-Hyp.

No. One attempt to hide = one hide check. The goblinoids make their opposed spot checks based on that single hide check.

 

[Lamoni]

No. One attempt to hide = one hide check. The goblinoids make their opposed spot checks based on that single hide check.

I agree, however I think that the point that was being made was that each new opponent could possibly be in a different location.

If you are hiding behind a tree, is it possible to hide from people on all sides of it? Yes. Just don't end up on the wrong side when they are looking in your direction.

Can you do it with one hide check? I say yes just to simplify things, but I wouldn't be too upset if the DM asked for a new roll for each new opponent that arrived on the scene.

If you can keep your hide check that was made BEFORE the opponent came onto the scene, that would imply that you could perfect your hide check before there was an opponent around to spot you. Which would say that take 20 is perfectly fine. I would still prefer to handle it with a circumstance modifier rather than allowing for a take 20. A take 10 is fine.

 

[Hypersmurf]

If you can keep your hide check that was made BEFORE the opponent came onto the scene, that would imply that you could perfect your hide check before there was an opponent around to spot you.

... with a potential ruling of 'as long as you've got someone to oppose you'.

Your friend attempts to Spot you, and you Take 20 on your Hide check. Then your friend goes away, and when the goblins show up, you use your pre-existing Hide check of 20+ to oppose their Spot checks.

-Hyp.

 

[Wolfwood2]

... with a potential ruling of 'as long as you've got someone to oppose you'.

Your friend attempts to Spot you, and you Take 20 on your Hide check. Then your friend goes away, and when the goblins show up, you use your pre-existing Hide check of 20+ to oppose their Spot checks.

I'd work this a little differently, though, as the real limit here is your friend's Spot check.

Suppose you have a +16 Hide check, and your friend has a +2 Spot check.

Just because he can't see you doesn't mean that you've hidden as best as you possibly could have. You could Take 10 on your Hide check, and there would be 0 possibility of your friend ever spotting you.

So what you're really doing is letting your friend take 20 on his spot check. When he can't see you, you know that you Hide check is 1 better than 20 plus his spot check, but that's all you know.

If your friend has a better Spot check than you have a Hide check, it's even worse. Since he knows you're around there somewhere, he can keep trying a Spot check every round until he succeeds, and you'll never successfully hide from him.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I'd work this a little differently, though, as the real limit here is your friend's Spot check.

Not really. Let's say I have a +4 Open Lock bonus, and there's a DC15 lock.

If I Take 20, the result which opens the lock is not 15; it's 24. Even though I only needed to 'roll' an 11, the Take 20 mechanic assumes that my result was a roll of 20.

If my friend has a Spot of +2, and I have a Hide of +9, I only need to 'roll' a 4 to beat his Take 10 Spot check. But if I Take 20, my 'roll' is a 20, even though I only needed a 4.

-Hyp.