Adjuticating the Search skill

[chomskola]

Ok, I thought this question deserved its own thread. In the PHB they suggest that outside of combat you dont need to "worry too much" about movement speed and position etc etc, what i take from that is that apart from marching order the apporach to play is fairly fluid.

SO of course, PC's usually search each area especially for traps. One of my players is quite fastidious, he wants to get the rogue to search every 5X5 for traps in every area. I am worried this will kill the game.

Now thats just one search, lets say he searches three times, thats a full round action for each 5X5, so in a room 20ft by 40ft you would be talking 32 full round actions(some would say "dull" round actions) or for 3 search attempts 96 full round actions to search it top to bottom. Now, this assumes only the rogue is doing the searching, although its normal for everyone to dig in, the team like the idea of the rogue trap proofing the room first.


I don't want to sidestep the core rules as such, but I do feel more comfortable with some way of "summing up the search". Granted, the time spent searching could be an opening for some roleplay among the group, but that could get old quick.

Some previous suggestions from another thread were take 20, or if DC is 15 for example take 1 1st round, take 2 second round and so on. This second idea is clever but even that sounds like it could slow the game down in some way. Another suggestion vis a vis the trap searches was to allow 3 rolls per room, and the DM predecides which is the "active" roll, keeping the suspense alive and stopping players "working out" where traps are easily. This is another concern of course, if players "keep at it" they may just discover most traps.

Other board members suggested the threat of wandering monsters and time penalties to keep heroes on their feet. IM also concerned that bullying the PCS will discourage them from searching at all which would be a bad result.

Some thoughts I had were:

1. limit the maximum time the same area can be searched per day, if you didnt find anything after 2-3 attempts, you need a "fresh pair of eyes" to see anything you missed before

2. Change the dimensions you can search in a full round action e.g. in a full round you can search 15X15 within ten feet of you per round rather than 5


I am curious how other DMS handle this whole area, the more replies the better, its a tricky subject and id really appreciate the feedback.

[Curmudgeon]

I don't have any problem just following the rules. If the players want their characters to search everything thoroughly, that usually doesn't take any extra play time; I just note the amount of in-world time and tell them they're going to get more random encounters if they maintain such slow progress. Sometimes they'll want to maintain the cautious pace, and sometimes they'll change their minds after they've used up their week's worth of rations just searching a dozen areas with "take 20" (2 minutes per 5' of wall, floor, or ceiling area).

[ericgrau]

Taking 10s and taking 20s cuts out a lot of rolls. 1 round per square to take a 10, 2 minutes per square to take a 20. If you have 10 minutes available, 100 rounds, to make 3 rolls per square, then you probably have an hour available to take a 20.

If you do roll, you could roll secretly for the player once per trap or secret door. That way you only need 1 or 2 rolls for the entire room. Fake rolls or prerolls on a piece of paper can keep the player from guessing how many things there are. Or have the player roll 3 times and don't tell him how many things there are in the room (if any).

[chomskola]

Cool, I dont necessarily want to 'hive off' the discussion along the lines of taking 10s and 20s. my main concern with taking 10/20 is as a DM agreeing to it you may be "telegraphing" to the players that the room/area is not somewhere dangerous if you allow them to take 10/20. OR maybe im understanding it wrongly?

[ericgrau]

"Threatened or distracted" is different from in danger. I'd be careful about not letting PCs take 10s on anything dangerous or you're basically saying you can never take a 10 when it actually matters. Whenever you're not in combat I would usually allow taking a 10.

Taking a 20 is a little different. It can be done whenever there is no negative consequence to rolling low, since taking a 20 is essentially also taking a 1 at the same time. The rule is there to save 20 game slowing rolls. I likewise find it unnecessary punishment to skill-monkeys to make traps trigger on failed search checks. Disable device is another story, but that's why you may not take a 20 on disable device.

[prufock]

I agree with Curmudgeon. Request that the players take 10 or take 20 depending on how much time they want to spend on their search. This will allow them to search the whole room with the same check; you just adjust the in-game time for the size of the room - 1 full round for each 5' square if you take 10, 2 minutes if you take 20. It's only IN-GAME time that increases, it shouldn't affect your time at the table.

But perhaps in-game time is a concern. If so, make a house rule: one search check per "room," (for basic wall/floor/ceiling features) and it takes 1-2 minutes. Boom, done. Give additional search checks for room features like chests, statues, etc.

If you want them to hurry up in-game, you can always add time-sensitive tasks. Time-delay traps, monsters chasing them, a limited window where the end goal is available, etc.

[White_Drake]

Taking ten or twenty is viable if there isn't any immediate threat--this precludes traps (unless they have already been sprung)--but taking twenty causes all of the consequences of a failed roll, so it would be somewhat inadvisable to take twenty while searching for traps.

Edit: Curse you, people who post while I type! *shakes fist*

[Ashtagon]

Normal unencumbered speed, you can cover 3000 feet in ten minutes walking. (600 squares)

Taking 10 to search each square, you can cover 500 feet in ten minutes walk-searching. (100 squares)

Taking 20 to search each square, you can cover 25 feet in ten minutes walk-searching. (5 squares)

You decide how fast you want to move.

[Otomodachi]

A way to streamline things without having to use 10/20 taking is ask your rogue player if they'd be alright using a dice roller program to generate a couple printed pages with several hundred d20 rolls on it and just work your way down the sheet when they're searching. Some people are suspiscious of dice programs (somewhat valid, doesn't matter here) but if they go for it, it might be a big help.

[ericgrau]

Taking a 10 is described in the PHB as a safety measure in case of failure. If danger of failure precludes taking a 10, then what's the point? The specific example of taking a 10 in the PHB is a climb check, which has the danger of falling. The example of when you cannot is when a goblin starts pelting the climber with sling stones. i.e., an actual distraction. Fear of failure does not count.

Some skill checks have listed negative consequences if you fail by 5 or more and this precludes taking a 20. Search is not one of those skills. It's a house rule to add it in.

I've always said skills and skillmonkeys really don't need nerfing but they get it all the time anyway. Since the consequences of failure even a quarter of the time are so drastic and the benefits of success so minor, the correct player response in such circumstances is to play something else and go without a party rogue. Like a barbarian; might as well have high hp to handle the inevitable trap.

[Vladislav]

There are several ways to handle such fastidious searching with no waste of precious table-time; coordinate with your PCs which you like best.

1. Assumption of always taking 10.
If the PC searcher has a +11 Seach modifier, he will find anything with a search DC 21 or less, and fail to find anything with a search DC 22 or higher.

2. Prerolling
You know there is a trap at the entrance of the room (DC 25) and a hidden drawer in a table (DC 20). You preroll for the trap (16+11 = 27), and for the drawer (5+11=16); you know the PC finds the trap, but not the hidden drawer.

3. Assumption of always taking 20.
Same as always taking 10, except takes 20 times longer in game time (but not in table time!) and finds anything with DC 31 or less, in our example.

[Telonius]

My houserule on the subject: Any character with Trapfinding can perform a special passive Search check. As a standard action, they can "take 5" on the check. (Normally Search is a full-round action). It's assumed to be on any time the character isn't taking another standard action in the turn. So if they're just walking around the dungeon (not taking double-moves, etc) they get their search modifier + 5. At their option, they can examine a particular object or area a bit more closely, and use the normal Search rules.

[chomskola]

Ok another issue with "taking 10/20". IF there are for example monsters, hiding in the room, when they spring their surprise the PCs need to be somewhere relative to the monsters, and that somewhere should be relevant to where the mosnters where hiding, but when we take 10/20 we dont specify where the pcs are in gridspace, which means the DM has to dictate. Also,if the room is trapped, for example the floor, walking over the floor woukld spring it. When we take 20 or ten do we assume the player occupies every square in the room or area at some point or another?

[Ashtagon]

Ok another issue with "taking 10/20". IF there are for example monsters, hiding in the room, when they spring their surprise the PCs need to be somewhere relative to the monsters, and that somewhere should be relevant to where the mosnters where hiding, but when we take 10/20 we dont specify where the pcs are in gridspace, which means the DM has to dictate. Also,if the room is trapped, for example the floor, walking over the floor woukld spring it. When we take 20 or ten do we assume the player occupies every square in the room or area at some point or another?

If you are merely "looking", you could be in the adjacent square. A proper search should also require touch, to sweep dust/cobwebs aside, check for pressure points, feel for uneven textures, etc. That definitely requires being in the same square.

Mean DMs might impose a -2 penalty if the player is only looking, and some hidden items (papers hidden under a book, "purloined letter" hiding) will simply not be detected at all.

[chomskola]

unfortunately the PHB and SRD doesnt specify how long taking ten takes, only taking 20. I suppose you could have the rogue take 20,and two other characters could take ten twice in the same timeframe.

[Gavinfoxx]

The thing is, you can search without touching from an adjacent square, though.

[Iskajir]

One thing our group has done is the "floating" search check. The rogue makes one roll, and states their procedure: "I check every 5' square in this corridor as we move forward" etc. That search roll is then applied to the first time there is something interesting to find. Time passes according to how long it would take to slowly search up the hall, but the gameplay isn't cluttered with:

"I roll a 27."
"You find nothing interesting in that square."
"I move forward and search the next sqaure. I roll a 24."
"You find nothing interesting in that square."

*rest of party starts snoring*

[Ashtagon]

The thing is, you can search without touching from an adjacent square, though.

That's pretty much what I said. SRD notes you can be up to 10 feet away.

I restate my claim though that you can't search the inside of a desk without opening a drawer, and you can't easily search for a hairline crack in a wall that makes the edge of a secret door except by touch. And you can't find a piece of paper hidden under a book without picking up the book.

I think it's quite reasonable to impose a -2 circumstance penalty if the player specifies he isn't stepping into the space he is searching, as well as ruling some things impossible to find.

[Rainbownaga]

unfortunately the PHB and SRD doesnt specify how long taking ten takes, only taking 20. I suppose you could have the rogue take 20,and two other characters could take ten twice in the same timeframe.

Taking 10 takes the usual time for an action; You're just taking an average to avoid any extremes (10 is actually slightly below average

Taking twenty takes 20 times longer (effectively getting each result once).