Cevah someone can be your enemy and hiding well before combat starts. Are you going to say that if I can spot someone hiding 200 feet away, and they can't see me I am in combat? If I am tell the GM I am taking 10 does not my take check just pretend the enemy does not exist?
Sure they can hide far away. You do not get a free reactive check. You can take an action to make a check any time you want.
As to being in combat, I tried to simplify by assuming combat was going to happen. It could be the greeting of friends, but if so, is it important to know who saw whom first? Rarely. In combat, it matters a lot.
Technically, at the first possible moment you could possibly spot someone, you get a reactive check. However, with all the penalties, this check is rarely made. You then get anther reactive check each round until someone spots the opposing party. This is subsumed in the determination of awareness of the surprise round. It avoids having to roll lots of times to no effect, recalculating the DC each round. If you take an action to perceive, that throws this subsuming off, and your action gives you effectively an extra checks that round.
/cevah
|
So why can't you do a passive perception check to see the tiger the moment before it decides to pounce before it thinks it's been spotted? When you're still the same distance away, so basically before combat has started.
There isn't really such a thing as a passive perception check in Pathfinder. Making a perception check takes an action. There are some abilities that allow you an automatic perception check in some situations (Trap Spotter, for example). As a GM, though, I'm not going to make the player tell me every time they want to make a perception check in normal situations where there is no danger. But if there is something hiding waiting to attack a character, and that character moves into the middle of the room without saying they are making a perception check, they're only going to get the one to avoid being surprised. If, instead, the player says "I scan the room and move forward," then they are taking an action to use perception, and sure, they can take 10.
Similarly, if a character opens a door without checking it for traps, they aren't going to get a perception check unless they have Trap Spotter or something similar.
A "passive" perception check is triggered by the presence of something to perceive. Voices down the hallway, the click of a trap, or someone stepping out of the shadows to attack. If the thing triggering that roll is an immediate danger, then take 10 should probably not apply. But honestly, it's also probably not a big deal if a GM allows a take 10 on something like the tiger charging out of stealth. It's not going to break the game.
Earlier parts of this thread about forcing a roll when climbing, though, do go against the take 10 rule. So I'm fine if a player is allowed to take 10 on a hidden charging tiger. I'm not ok if they aren't allowed to take 10 when climbing out of combat (provided there's no equally distracting thing happening, like a wind storm or something). I'd rather err on the side of the players.
5th Edition (and apparently 4e) includes rules for passive perception checks, but to my knowledge, Pathfinder does not, other than abilities that grant an automatic roll in certain situations.
|
|
I mean as a rules term. There is nothing in pathfinder defined as a passive perception check. If you read the rest of my message and my previous message I say that I don't think a GM should be pedantic about it or try to play gotcha with the players.
EDIT: A PC need not stop walking to look at the scenery, but a PC moving full speed (two move actions per 6 seconds) is not exactly walking and isn't going to see as much as one who is moving slower. Also, seeing the scenery does not require a perception check. Finding Waldo (or the stealthed tiger) does.
|
|
What I am saying is basically what is written under the Action section of the Perception skill.
Action
Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus. Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action.
Reactive, in response to observable stimulus. Something triggers the check.
right so the hiding tiger is a constant "observable stimulus" as you walk towards it and you're not in "danger" that entire time until the tiger decides it's going to try and attack now. So you make a check every 10 ft as there's a new DC every 10 feet to check against.
|
|
That's up to the GM to determine how often you get a check. And again, it depends on how the character is acting. If they are moving slowly and carefully, sure. If they move their miniature all the way across a 50 foot room and say "I go to this door," I'd be less inclined to consider them being careful (though even that would depend on several factors, like whether they're rushing because they're being hasty, or because there's limited time left in the session and they're trying to help get through the scenario on time), and I'd probably tell them to place their character in the spot where the tiger decides to pounce then ask for a perception check to see if they are surprised, which I'd be inclined to not allow a take 10 on.
We're going round on a very fine point in the rule that just isn't defined well enough in Pathfinder. It's a GM's call, and like I said earlier, I'd be fine with a GM who ruled you can take 10 on the tiger. For me that's going to depend more on how the characters are proceeding and it's not automatic. For you, it might be something you'd allow. But I don't think there's enough in the rules to say one way or the other which is "correct," and I doubt many players are going to argue against being able to take 10.
|
|
What I am saying is basically what is written under the Action section of the Perception skill.
Reactive, in response to observable stimulus. Something triggers the check.Action
Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus. Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action.
Um, yeah, that's the whole point. If you make your perception check, you observe it. That 'something' that triggers it is the creature hiding in the bush.
Using move actions with perception to actively search is looking for stuff that is otherwise not observable, like a ring hidden inside a pile of garbage, a key inside a drawer, a pile of coins underneath some bedding.
This is stuff that you have no line of sight to actually observe.
That has nothing to do with creatures hiding in ambush. If they can see you, then you can see them, and a reactive check is entirely appropriate.
I never said you don't get a check against the tiger. But I am saying its up to the GM to decide how often you get a check against the tiger, and they certainly aren't obligated to give it to you every 10 feet.
There isn't really such a thing as a passive perception check in Pathfinder. Making a perception check takes an action.
Is there some significant difference I'm missing between a 'passive perception check' and 'Most Perception checks are reactive...'.
A reactive perception check sounds very much like a passive one to me - e.g, no action required, it is something that just happens.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The DC changes every 10 feet, why wouldn't you get a new check every 10 feet? What, you're going to have them fail the check at 100' with a +10 to the DC, and then not let them try again until they get bushwacked?
Again, this is why the take 10 mechanics actually are far superior. Given a particular stealth DC, you can use a character's perception+10 to determine how close they get before they detect the ambush (if they see it at all). That way you aren't rolling every 10' which in effect gives them close to a 'take 20'.
This I don't really have a problem with. If your take 10 will spot the tiger at a farther distance than the tiger will charge, then sure, you spot the tiger before it attacks.
I'm saying if the tiger charges before you would have spotted it, then you have to roll to see if you're surprised. And I don't think it's a take 10 situation anymore, because combat is already starting.
The situation that is less clear is if the tiger will charge at the exact distance at which the character would spot it. Should the character be allowed to take 10 then?
Maybe some concrete examples?
Tiger's stealth roll is 20. The tiger will charge when someone is 30 feet away.
Your perception take 10 is 28.
You are 60 feet from the tiger, so your modified roll is 16.
If you move up to 40 feet away, your modified roll would be 20. I'm fine with saying the character spots the tiger.
If instead your take 10 was 24, you would have to be 20 feet away from the tiger to spot it. The tiger charges when you are 30 feet away. You roll (no take 10, and a take 10 would fail anyway). Some of the suggestions have seemed to imply that because you would spot it at 20 feet, you can't be surprised, and that's part of what I don't agree with. It's 30 feet away when it starts combat, so that's the distance the roll is based on.
Now, back to the original numbers. Your take 10 is a 28. You announce that you are going to move 60 feet to the door on the other side of the room. You're also rushing because you have a minute per level buff going. I don't think you get the benefit of a check every 10 feet that you move in that situation. You didn't see the tiger from the door. You proceeded assuming the room was safe and in a reckless fashion. The tiger gets a chance to surprise you. That's all I'm saying.
EDIT: To clarify, you would get a check when the tiger charges, but I would not allow a take 10 in that situation, because it is the start of combat.
Also, I left off the example of you spotting the tiger at 30 feet with a take 10. That's the distance te tiger charges. There are no order of operation rules for perception checks vs starting combat, so I'd be inclined to let's the dice decide and not allow a take 10.
|
|
Using move actions with perception to actively search is looking for stuff that is otherwise not observable, like a ring hidden inside a pile of garbage, a key inside a drawer, a pile of coins underneath some bedding.
This is stuff that you have no line of sight to actually observe.
That has nothing to do with creatures hiding in ambush. If they can see you, then you can see them, and a reactive check is entirely appropriate.
Also, for the record, this is actually not at all what using a move action to make a perception check is. Using a move action to make a perception check does not require doing anything except standing in one place and saying I look at the room. You do not have to lift anything, open any drawers, or otherwise touch or move anything. You are just actively searching, with your eyes, ears, nose, etc. it can be with your hands, like if you say you want to open a drawer, or by taste, like trying to identify a potion, but it doesn't have to be. Treating it like you describe is actually a big penalty to characters.
And, a creature using stealth is hidden in the way you describe those other things to be. It has to have concealment in order to use stealth in the first place barring something like Hide in Plain Sight.
|
|
There isn't really such a thing as a passive perception check in Pathfinder. Making a perception check takes an action.Is there some significant difference I'm missing between a 'passive perception check' and 'Most Perception checks are reactive...'.
A reactive perception check sounds very much like a passive one to me - e.g, no action required, it is something that just happens.
A passive perception check in this sense, detecting a creature using stealth, is being presented as always getting to use your full perception roll every 10 feet you move. Meaning if something is trying to remain hidden with a DC 30 to spot, even if you aren't looking for it at all, you'll spot it if you have a +20 perception. I don't think that's the way it works.
A reactive check is you're in a room. Someone is approaching the room talking to someone else and not trying to hide or be stealthy. You get a chance to hear them before they get through the door.
Cevah someone can be your enemy and hiding well before combat starts. Are you going to say that if I can spot someone hiding 200 feet away, and they can't see me I am in combat? If I am tell the GM I am taking 10 does not my take check just pretend the enemy does not exist?Sure they can hide far away. You do not get a free reactive check. You can take an action to make a check any time you want.
As to being in combat, I tried to simplify by assuming combat was going to happen. It could be the greeting of friends, but if so, is it important to know who saw whom first? Rarely. In combat, it matters a lot.
Technically, at the first possible moment you could possibly spot someone, you get a reactive check. However, with all the penalties, this check is rarely made. You then get anther reactive check each round until someone spots the opposing party. This is subsumed in the determination of awareness of the surprise round. It avoids having to roll lots of times to no effect, recalculating the DC each round. If you take an action to perceive, that throws this subsuming off, and your action gives you effectively an extra checks that round.
/cevah
Reactive checks by the rules are free and ho often you see a character able to spot a hidden enemy has nothing to do with the actual rules.
All Perception checks require an action, unless a special ability allows otherwise?
Passive Perception checks do not exist?
I don't believe that.
A PC need not stop walking, just to look at the scenery.
There is no passive check but I know you are referring to the reactionary check. To keep things moving forward I think we should use the book term instead of the word "passive".
|
A PC taking a walk, or full move action, is moving about 6mph.
That's about the same as a brisk walking speed.
This is not a blinding effect.
You can easily view the surrounding area, noticing the path you are walking, things along the side of the path, and even view the horizon.
This is a common thing that you may see hiker's do. Especially expert hikers, who need to be aware of their surroundings.
They need not stop every 3 seconds, and stare for 3 seconds, just to be aware of what is around them.
|
|
There is no passive check but I know you are referring to the reactionary check. To keep things moving forward I think we should use the book term instead of the word "passive".All Perception checks require an action, unless a special ability allows otherwise?
Passive Perception checks do not exist?
I don't believe that.
A PC need not stop walking, just to look at the scenery.
I will now use the term "Reactive".
I would suggest anyone here FAQ this thread. →→ Observable Stimuli
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The DC changes every 10 feet, why wouldn't you get a new check every 10 feet? What, you're going to have them fail the check at 100' with a +10 to the DC, and then not let them try again until they get bushwacked?
One reactive check per round seems like a reasonable frequency to me.
|
|
There isn't really such a thing as a passive perception check in Pathfinder. Making a perception check takes an action.Is there some significant difference I'm missing between a 'passive perception check' and 'Most Perception checks are reactive...'.
A reactive perception check sounds very much like a passive one to me - e.g, no action required, it is something that just happens.
A passive perception check in this sense, detecting a creature using stealth, is being presented as always getting to use your full perception roll every 10 feet you move. Meaning if something is trying to remain hidden with a DC 30 to spot, even if you aren't looking for it at all, you'll spot it if you have a +20 perception. I don't think that's the way it works.
A reactive check is you're in a room. Someone is approaching the room talking to someone else and not trying to hide or be stealthy. You get a chance to hear them before they get through the door.
That's exactly how it works. You get a reactive check in both cases. The DC is just a lot lower in the second case.
Seriously, man, where are you getting your rules from? Where does it say you have to 'actively' use perception to beat a stealth check.
Does this mean that guards you're trying to sneak past, using stealth, have to be spending 'move actions' to try and perceive you? Is that how you run it? Guards on patrol can move, and then have to spend a move action to try and 'detect' anyone that is sneaking around?
They get one check. EDIT: Meaning they get one reactive check. They only get an additional check if they take the time to spend a move action, or if the character using stealth lingers in the area for too long.
The way I would run the tiger scenario is this:
Character opens the door. Since there's something stealthed in the room, I'd ask for a perception check (I wouldn't want to assume the player wants to take 10 in this situation). The player could choose to take 10 or not. Whatever they do decide, that's their roll to spot the tiger unless they later actively spend a move action to look. If they roll and get less than a 10, they don't get another roll just because they move forward 10 feet. They're stuck with the result they got. If that result will spot the tiger when they are 10 feet closer, then they'll spot the tiger. If not, they don't.
What you are suggesting sounds to me like a guard that is walking but not paying any particular attention to the surroundings has the same chance to see a character using stealth as a guard who is actively spending a move action every round to look for something out of the ordinary. Does that sound right?
|
|
I would suggest anyone here FAQ this thread. →→ Observable Stimuli
FAQ'd. Do you have a link to the other thread mentioned in that thread? It sounds like there's some kind of posting from a designer somewhere indicating what the errata will be? That would be worth taking a look at.
|
|
So your take on it is a character can roll up to three times per round, one reactive, one as a move action, and one as a standard action? I could be ok with that take on it. One reactive check per round is reasonable.
Where I start to disconnect is with allowing an action taken based on that check to be interrupted. Say a guard takes their reactive check (taking 10 or not). They don't spot the hidden character because of distance. Does it matter whether or not they then slowly walk forward or instead they run forward? Can they always interrupt their declared action once they get into a range they would have seen the hidden character? Or can the hidden creature surprise them? That's where I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this.
If I think the room is safe, and I declare I'm moving to a door on the other side of the room, and I'm rushing because I don't want to lose a buff spell, do I get to interrupt that action and not be surprised if my perception roll from the door would have seen the hidden creature had I been closer?
|
|
Actually, rereading the discussion on perception linked above, it makes no sense to detect a stealthed character using a move action 'search' unless you're actively searching the 10x10 area that the stealthy guy is in.
Using perception to 'detect' things is passive/reactive, using perception to 'search' an area is the active move action.
Yeah, that thread has new information. The 10'x10' rule is not currently in the Pathfinder rules, and that would definitely change things. That's why I asked for a link to the thread referenced over there, to see what's been posted.
Honestly, this discussion has gotten pretty far off topic from the take 10 question, and that's largely my fault. I'd suggest we follow that thread and take any further discussion about this over there instead of continuing to be off topic here.
EDIT: It sounds from the other thread like there is new information in Pathfinder Unchained. I have to admit, I've only looked at the classes in that book, since I mostly play PFS. I'll read through Unchained tomorrow after I've gotten some sleep.
I would suggest anyone here FAQ this thread. →→ Observable StimuliFAQ'd. Do you have a link to the other thread mentioned in that thread? It sounds like there's some kind of posting from a designer somewhere indicating what the errata will be? That would be worth taking a look at.
If I was not on my phone I would give the link. It sucks trying to find information. My OS is reinstalling so I will give the link as soon as I can.
So your take on it is a character can roll up to three times per round, one reactive, one as a move action, and one as a standard action? I could be ok with that take on it. One reactive check per round is reasonable.
Where I start to disconnect is with allowing an action taken based on that check to be interrupted. Say a guard takes their reactive check (taking 10 or not). They don't spot the hidden character because of distance. Does it matter whether or not they then slowly walk forward or instead they run forward? Can they always interrupt their declared action once they get into a range they would have seen the hidden character? Or can the hidden creature surprise them? That's where I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this.
If I think the room is safe, and I declare I'm moving to a door on the other side of the room, and I'm rushing because I don't want to lose a buff spell, do I get to interrupt that action and not be surprised if my perception roll from the door would have seen the hidden creature had I been closer?
In pathfinder there's no difference in perception checks for running or walking leisurely. All movement is done in 5ft increments, so you can stop or change your direction at any point in your movement, so as you move to the door when you move 5ft and see the tiger you can decide what do do, continue your movement to the door? Back up? Do a standard action? So unless they were doing something that couldn't be stopped, like a charge or in the middle of casting a spell, then yes the can stop at any moment of their actions. The hidden creature surprises them if it launches into an attack and some of the players are unaware of it, otherwise it cannot surprise them. There's no surprises for you when you know something is there, heck if the Tiger doesn't know the PC's are there the PC's can do a surprise on a Tiger waiting for food to come by.
If you are still confused please explain where and I'll try to elucidate further.How you handle the checks every 10ft isn't defined as well. But every 10ft you'll have a DC that the PC's can beat. And it doesn't seem fair to prevent them from doing it because you don't want to make them check every 10ft.
Something I think that helps is to realize that you should assume that PC's are doing some basic things unsaid. Like having their eyes open. Constantly doing some looking. Heck, if it's not time critical think to yourself that they are doing a perception check every bit of movement they make.
I will allow players to declare taking 10 but I wont keep giving them free rolls. That is unfair to the stealthed character (PC or NPC).
ok. I am back online, at least good enough to post normally.
Stupid computer <grumble grumble>
Ferious ThuneSo as requested here are the links.
When I first heard of a distinction between what a move action and reactive perception check does. <--It is not directed mentioned. He mentions for the first time that some rules were left out of the perception skill accidentally.
Notice Creatures and Details
You can detect a creature that is using Stealth if you succeed at an opposed Perception check. You can also notice sights, sounds, and other stimuli detectable by your senses. Use the search function of Perception (see below) to find hidden objects, traps, secret doors, and other things that take time to detect.
After this there is a table that says "stimuli"
At the bottom of that table it says "Notice a creature using Stealth"
Then there is another table with the modifiers such as distance modifiers.
Then it says "Action: None. This function is largely reactive in response to observable stimuli."
So there we have a stealth creature as a stimuli and no action which is the same as the reactive check in the CRB.
Now lets move on to the next use of perception. No pun intended
Search Locations
You can thoroughly comb an area, looking for hidden traps, doors, and the like. The same modifiers that apply to Perception DCs to notice (see above) also apply to Perception DCs to search.
Just like I said the move action is to find things such as hidden doors.
The book then goes on to say
"Action: Move. Each move action spent allows you to search a 10-foot-by-10-foot area"
I will allow players to declare taking 10 but I wont keep giving them free rolls. That is unfair to the stealthed character (PC or NPC).Yeah, that effectively becomes a 'take 20'.
If they want to roll for their reactive perception, how long is that roll 'good for'?
I did not say they could not take 10. I am saying there wont be multiple rerolls if nothing is changing except for them walking forward.
As for how long until they reroll that depends on various factors.
Are they asking to take 10 every 10 feet?
Has the hider moved and therefore had to reroll their stealth?
etc etc...
I will allow players to declare taking 10 but I wont keep giving them free rolls. That is unfair to the stealthed character (PC or NPC).Yeah, that effectively becomes a 'take 20'.
If they want to roll for their reactive perception, how long is that roll 'good for'?
As I suggested before, that roll is good for that stimulus. If the stimulus changes, they get another roll.
Otherwise that roll still applies. They'll spot the hidden stimulus at the distance they would have spotted it with that roll.
If they beat the DC without distance modifiers by 3, they'll see it at 30'. If they don't see it by the time the hidden creature springs the ambush, they'll get a separate perception check to see if they can act in the surprise round.
I agree that if the stimulus changes they get a new roll.
It also seems that by RAW they get another roll at the point the ambush is sprung, but I hope that is a mistake on Paizo's part.
Do they get a separate roll for each 'stimulus' (creature) in an ambush, or do they only get to roll against the worst stealth bonus?
This is a good question. I could see someone saying they roll once, and see who they see, and there is also a case for each stimulus getting it's own roll, but then if you roll high for the low stealth goblin/tiger(insert other creature as needed) the question becomes do you also get to see the high stealth roller. Unlike the move action perception check you are not confined to a specific area.
I think that by RAW/RAI each stimuli/creature gets a perception roll against it. This is another question I will ask when this gets answered.
Many GM's just give everyone the same stealth for the sake of ease, but what I would like to do is have one roll per party member, and you see whoever you see.<---This is a speed issue more than anything else. What I have done in the past is roll the dice in secret before the players show up so if I need a secret roll, I will just move down the list and mark numbers off. However if we are taking 10 it likely won't matter with regard to speed.
In any event if you only beat the stealth of the low rollers then you do not see the higher rollers, so you may think there are only 2 ambushers, and there may be 5 or 6. I don't think it was the intent for those who hide well to lose stealth, so they(those not noticed) might still get a surprise round.
|
|
I'm starting to come around on this, mainly because of the information in the other thread and a couple of good posts here like Chess Pwn's.
Something I think that helps is to realize that you should assume that PC's are doing some basic things unsaid. Like having their eyes open. Constantly doing some looking. Heck, if it's not time critical think to yourself that they are doing a perception check every bit of movement they make.
The thing is, I believed I was doing that. I can say from experience that I ask for a lot more perception checks than most GMs I've run into in PFS. The reason I didn't always allow a second or third or whatever check when a character advances is because I believed making a check took time.
Let's assume for now that you're correct and try to bring this back on topic, take 10. You've taken 10, and you move forward to a point where you would see the tiger, but it's also the point the tiger will attack. Do you:
A) automatically see it, no roll needed. Perception always happens before a surprise attack.
B) make a new roll to see if you notice it moving to avoid being surprised.
C) not get another roll.
If it's B, can you take 10? Keeping in mind these same rules apply when a player is trying to stealth also.
As an aside, does anyone know where it says you don't get a perception check to see a trap unless you are actively searching? Because if what you're all saying is true, I can't figure out what Trap Spotter does.
But then, assuming you didn't make it at distance, you're guaranteed to only see one when you first spot the threat (barring creatures with the same stealth total, I suppose.)
OTOH, if everyone in the stealth group rolls stealth and everyone in the party rolls that many rolls against them, you're getting close to a Take 20 (or worse - the parties highest roll against the ambusher's lowest) situation. Strictest RAW, I'd agree. Everyone gets a roll against each stimulus. I can't imagine ever playing that way.
Metagame wise, you'd also be telling them how many ambushers there were. Obviously you could handle that with secret rolls ahead of time, but you'd potentially need a lot of them.
Take 10 of course makes all of this go away. :)
Edit: Also changes the tactics - the ambushers have a strong motivation to use Take 10, since one being spotted before the targets are in position ruins the ambush. Me rolling a 20 doesn't help if someone else in the group rolls a 1. With more than a couple people, you're not all going to beat Take 10, so use it.
OTOH, Take 10 would be dumb for the approaching group. It works the other way this time - One good roll spots the ambush and you can tell the others and prepare.
I would likely roll in secret instead of saying "roll 5 perception checks." I have tended to have all of the ambushers take 10 as a GM in the past so I can avoid tracking who specifically saw which hidden creature.
PS:
I think you get to act in a surprise round if your perception makes you 'ready for combat', in that you see at least one opponent when combat begins.
I agree. They can't really ambush you if you know they are there.
|
|
ok. I am back online, at least good enough to post normally.
Stupid computer <grumble grumble>Ferious ThuneSo as requested here are the links.
When I first heard of a distinction between what a move action and reactive perception check does. <--It is not directed mentioned. He mentions for the first time that some rules were left out of the perception skill accidentally.
Notice Creatures and Details
You can detect a creature that is using Stealth if you succeed at an opposed Perception check. You can also notice sights, sounds, and other stimuli detectable by your senses. Use the search function of Perception (see below) to find hidden objects, traps, secret doors, and other things that take time to detect.
After this there is a table that says "stimuli"
At the bottom of that table it says "Notice a creature using Stealth"
Then there is another table with the modifiers such as distance modifiers.
Then it says "Action: None. This function is largely reactive in response to observable stimuli."
So there we have a stealth creature as a stimuli and no action which is the same as the reactive check in the CRB.
Now lets move on to the next use of perception. No pun intended
Search Locations
You can thoroughly comb an area, looking for hidden traps, doors, and the like. The same modifiers that apply to Perception DCs to notice (see above) also apply to Perception DCs to search.Just like I said the move action is to find things such as hidden doors.
The book then goes on to...
This definitely does change things. But what does that do for taking 20 on a perception roll to find a trap? It's given as a specific example in the take 20 rules, and when that's been debated before, the reason given was always that you didn't actually have to move or touch anything to use perception. If it's now a search of a 10x10 square opening drawers and the like, shouldn't taking 20 set off the trap?
|
|
If the take 20 is high enough to see the trap, then (by being extra careful) the characters notice the trap before they open any drawers that are guarded by the trap.
But now we're changing what take 20 means, too. Take 20 assumes you fail many times before you succeed. It's not being extra careful, it's taking extra time and trying again and again. That's why you can't take 20 to disarm a trap.
This definitely does change things. But what does that do for taking 20 on a perception roll to find a trap? It's given as a specific example in the take 20 rules, and when that's been debated before, the reason given was always that you didn't actually have to move or touch anything to use perception. If it's now a search of a 10x10 square opening drawers and the like, shouldn't taking 20 set off the trap?
You choose a 10 x 10 area. It does not say you have to actually go there. It specifically says you use the modifier(bonus/penalty) table which includes the distance penalty.
Here is a quote from my other post from the book:
"The same modifiers that apply to Perception DCs to notice (see above) also apply to Perception DCs to search."