Taking 20 on skills, Disguise specfically

[Wolfepuppy]

Is it possible to take 20 on a disguise check?

If no, would a changeling be aloud to take 20 on a disguise check. Support being they could sit in a mirror and continually us their minor shape change until they got the perfect look. This wouldn't take the 3 or 4 hours that doing a regular disguise check 20 times over would take because they can use the skill with this ability as a full round action which would mean it would only take 2 minutes to do the disguise 20 times. My math may be wrong but if you used this in conjunction with taking 20 on spot could you just do 20x20 times to simultaneously take 20 on both of them so you know your disguise is good that would be spending 20 rounds of spot on each disguise check so it would be 400 rounds which would be 2400 seconds or 40 min?

This would almost guarantee your disguise leading to why changelings are hardly ever discovered in Eberron, leading to a 20(take 20) +10(minor shape change) +ranks +Cha without items. Looking at at least 30 with hat of disguise looking at 40. Not bad for only 40min of work right?

[Gildedragon]

Taking 20 for disguise: yeah I allow it. You take your time, have a friend come over, give you an honest opinion, try again

Masterwork tool: mirror with a frosted glass frame perpetual flame cast on the inside of the frame for even lighting

[.Zero]

I recently had an issue with my DM. We were in a desert and needed to go in the nearest city. It was around midday (I assumed my character could easily define where is north, south, east and west), and i had a map of that area. i decided to take 20 on Survival, but my DM wasn't on my side and we get lost in the middle of nowhere. Is it possible to take 20 on survival for the purpose to find the road?

[Benthesquid]

For something like Disguise or Stealth, my usual ruling is that you can take twenty, but you can't have a higher total score than your own perception, or that of someone assisting you.

As far as survival, keeping in mind that Taking Twenty assumes you fail many times before succeeding. In that case, I'd say that you're likely to become hopelessly lost in the desert long before you find the road.

[Kazudo]

As long as there's no penalty for failure, you can definitely take 20. HOWEVER, there's a matter of how LONG it would take. Considering the Survival entry has this wonderful little gem:



Retries to avoid getting lost in a specific situation or to avoid a specific natural hazard are not allowed.


And this one as well


Varies. A single Survival check may represent activity over the course of hours or a full day.


Which dictate that, should the DM allow taking 20, the time necessary to do so could be literally 20 days, or as low as 2 minutes depending on how the DM rules it. It also may not even be possible since there is a penalty for failure in the first quote.

Concerning Disguise, there's this:



You get only one Disguise check per use of the skill, even if several people are making Spot checks against it. The Disguise check is made secretly, so that you can’t be sure how good the result is.


and this
You may try to redo a failed disguise, but once others know that a disguise was attempted, they’ll be more suspicious.
[/QUOTE]

Which would tell me that taking 20 isn't an option (because it implies that after rolling a certain number of times you'd have eventually succeeded in getting a 20) because of the first paragraph, but in the second quote it would be 20 times more likely that anyone observing you would see you, since you'd be actively altering your disguise while being viewed.

There's this last bit:


The Disguise check is made secretly, so that you can’t be sure how good the result is.


Which tells me that since you don't know if you've failed aside from the number of the nice, you shouldn't be able to TELL if you've succeeded enough in character for taking 20 to be viable.

[Mnemnosyne]

Which tells me that since you don't know if you've failed aside from the number of the nice, you shouldn't be able to TELL if you've succeeded enough in character for taking 20 to be viable.
This is why you need a friend to do this. After each attempt, your friend takes 20 on his spot check. The trick is you need a friend with exactly one less spot than you have disguise, that way, when your disguise is good enough to fool your friend, you know you have succeeded.

[HammeredWharf]

Which tells me that since you don't know if you've failed aside from the number of the nice, you shouldn't be able to TELL if you've succeeded enough in character for taking 20 to be viable.

In a way, yes. However, if you have someone with high enough Spot, I suppose that person could tell you how good your disguise is. If your bonuses are roughly equal, that person would have to take 20 between checks, so taking 20 on Disguise would take 3d(10+2) minutes.

Edit: Almost swordsaged, but I wouldn't mind if the spotter had more ranks in Spot than the disguiser has in Disguise. If he can beat the DC, he should be able to tell you how good the disguise was. "Hmm, I can spot your disguise 15% of the time, so you've done your best."

[Kazudo]

In that specific circumstance I could see that happening, though a DM could rule that the individual wouldn't be able to specifically HELP you make your disguise better and then do the spot check again. You'd probably have to get a whole team of people to help.

If there's a team of people helping with a disguise, each one taking turns spotting and then giving Aid Another skill Checks to improve the disguise, I'd say the same thing.

Then all you need to do is roll the disguise check to act in character. Which you arguably couldn't take 20 on.

[Gildedragon]

In a way, yes. However, if you have someone with high enough Spot, I suppose that person could tell you how good your disguise is. If your bonuses are roughly equal, that person would have to take 20 between checks, so taking 20 on Disguise would take 3d(10+2) minutes.

Edit: Almost swordsaged, but I wouldn't mind if the spotter had more ranks in Spot than the disguiser has in Disguise. If he can beat the DC, he should be able to tell you how good the disguise was. "Hmm, I can spot your disguise 15% of the time, so you've done your best."

Or a mirror; takes longer but you take 20 on your spot check against yourself, and keep working at it

[Fitz10019]

You can't take 20 on a Spot check. "Spot" is an interpretation of what you saw (like "Listen" is an interpretation of what your heard), and it's always possible to mistake one thing for another. No matter how careful you are, or how much time you have, you can't stop yourself from making a misjudgement. These are Wisdom-based rolls. Remember getting a question wrong on an easy test you had an abundance of time to complete? You misinterpreted the question. The same can happen with Spot or Listen.

As for Disguise, the mirror and the extra time you're taking could amount to circumstance bonus(es) (decided by the DM), but in the end there is one roll (by the DM), no take 10 and no take 20.

As a guideline, don't expect to take 20 on anything that is an opposed roll.

[Kazudo]

You can't take 20 on a Spot check. "Spot" is an interpretation of what you saw (like "Listen" is an interpretation of what your heard), and it's always possible to mistake one thing for another. No matter how careful you are, or how much time you have, you can't stop yourself from making a misjudgement. These are Wisdom-based rolls. Remember getting a question wrong on an easy test you had an abundance of time to complete? You misinterpreted the question. The same can happen with Spot or Listen.

As for Disguise, the mirror and the extra time you're taking could amount to circumstance bonus(es) (decided by the DM), but in the end there is one roll (by the DM), no take 10 and no take 20.

As a guideline, don't expect to take 20 on anything that is an opposed roll.

For spot, you're wrong.



Try Again

Yes. You can try to spot something that you failed to see previously at no penalty.




When you have plenty of time (generally 2 minutes for a skill that can normally be checked in 1 round, one full-round action, or one standard action), you are faced with no threats or distractions, and the skill being attempted carries no penalties for failure, you can take 20.




Every time you have a chance to spot something in a reactive manner you can make a Spot check without using an action. Trying to spot something you failed to see previously is a move action.




If you come to the attention of people who are suspicious (such as a guard who is watching commoners walking through a city gate), it can be assumed that such observers are taking 10 on their Spot checks.


Essentially, anything that you can take 10 on you can take 20 on as long as you have the time to do so.

2 minutes would be ample time to take 20 on Spot.

[Fitz10019]

For spot, you're wrong.

Essentially, anything that you can take 10 on you can take 20 on as long as you have the time to do so.

2 minutes would be ample time to take 20 on Spot.

I hear you, and maybe we'll never agree, but seeing fuzzy bundle and believing it is a pine cone when it is actually a hedgehog is a failure, invalidating the 'no penalty of failure' excuse. Getting it wrong is the penalty whether that hedgehog steals your hairbrush or not.

You can 'try again' to see the thing your ally is trying to point out to you, but in that case you have a reason to try again. Trying again without a reason is meta-gaming the skill check.

That's my 2 cents. Disagree as you will. No DM is 'wrong' if he says no to taking 20 on an opposed roll.

[Kazudo]

That's strictly in the territory of Rule Zero. By RAW, there's nothing stopping you.

[Jeff the Green]

I hear you, and maybe we'll never agree, but seeing fuzzy bundle and believing it is a pine cone when it is actually a hedgehog is a failure, invalidating the 'no penalty of failure' excuse. Getting it wrong is the penalty whether that hedgehog steals your hairbrush or not.

You can 'try again' to see the thing your ally is trying to point out to you, but in that case you have a reason to try again. Trying again without a reason is meta-gaming the skill check.

That's my 2 cents. Disagree as you will. No DM is 'wrong' if he says no to taking 20 on an opposed roll.

I think taking 20 on Spot checks is okay as long as your opponent is using only one role (say, lying in ambush or in disguise). If they're continually making new rolls (they're moving while hiding, for instance), it's not okay. I suppose you could, sort of, by both taking 20 twenty times, but I have a hard time imagining that happening.

[Lightlawbliss]

Essentially, anything that you can take 10 on you can take 20 on as long as you have the time to do so.

not exactly. Taking 10 is not as demanding as taking 20.

[The Grue]

not exactly. Taking 10 is not as demanding as taking 20.

Your statement in no way contradicts the one you quoted.

Regarding taking 20 on Disguise: Either interpretation seems equally valid, so check with your DM.I don't see any reason why it shouldn't work, but it would take a long time.


Action
Creating a disguise requires 1d3×10 minutes of work.


Taking 20
Taking 20 means you are trying until you get it right, and it assumes that you fail many times before succeeding. Taking 20 takes twenty times as long as making a single check would take.

In other words, taking 20 on a Disguise check should take 20(1d3*10) minutes, or between 1 hour 20 minutes and 10 hours. If I were DMing I'd take the average and say it takes 6 hours 40 minutes.

That's for a mundane disguise of course. If a spellcaster had 20 copies of disguise self prepared then it'd take 20 rounds, or 2 minutes. Same for Changelings - shapechange ability is a full-round action right?

[Ravens_cry]

In other words, taking 20 on a Disguise check should take 20(1d3*10) minutes, or between 1 hour 20 minutes and 10 hours. If I were DMing I'd take the average and say it takes 6 hours 40 minutes.
?
Given how long make up can take in Real Life™, especially make up that could effectively disguise ones race and gender, those times are pretty much on target.

[TuggyNE]

Essentially, anything that you can take 10 on you can take 20 on as long as you have the time to do so.

Not necessarily. You can explicitly take 10 on climbing a wall even if your modifier is low enough to have a chance of falling off, which prevents you from taking 20 at all.


I hear you, and maybe we'll never agree, but seeing fuzzy bundle and believing it is a pine cone when it is actually a hedgehog is a failure, invalidating the 'no penalty of failure' excuse. Getting it wrong is the penalty whether that hedgehog steals your hairbrush or not.

Hrm. "Failure" and "penalty for failure" are different. If nothing happens on a failed check (specifically, on 19 of them in a row), then taking 20 is fine, but if at any point the failure causes something worse than "nothing happens", taking 20 is out, because that guarantees that worse thing.

Spotting someone in ambush generally carries the penalty of them ambushing you before the 20th round, or, failing that, simply moving a little to disrupt your spotting ability, so I'd bar opposed Spot/Listen checks on principle, as well as Disguise/Spot; I'm not sure the fuzzy hedgehog example is really a good one, though.

[Wolfepuppy]

Hrm. "Failure" and "penalty for failure" are different. If nothing happens on a failed check (specifically, on 19 of them in a row), then taking 20 is fine, but if at any point the failure causes something worse than "nothing happens", taking 20 is out, because that guarantees that worse thing.

Spotting someone in ambush generally carries the penalty of them ambushing you before the 20th round, or, failing that, simply moving a little to disrupt your spotting ability, so I'd bar opposed Spot/Listen checks on principle, as well as Disguise/Spot; I'm not sure the fuzzy hedgehog example is really a good one, though.

I think opposed Disguise spot checks would be doable in a cooperative fashion though. For example if you fail to see through a friends disguise you simply do not see through the disguise, in other words "nothing happens." With disguise it says for trying again the PHB says


Yes. You may try to redo a failed disguise, but once others know that a disguise was attempted they will be more suspicious.

The person helping you already knows you are trying to disguise yourself so they aren't going to be any more suspicious and as long as you are behind closed doors and your friend dosn't tell anyone there is someone attempting a disguise no one else will be any more suspiciouse than before. Now if your in public and you try to do a disguise, taking 20 would be imposible, as it would take you hours and everyone would know what was going on.

Taking 20 on spot is a little different. If you are spotting for 2 minutes and someone is hiding but they don't do anything for the 2 minutes then I think it would be possible to take 20 but if they move it would not. The situation must remain exactly the same for the 2 minutes that you are taking 20

[Vogonjeltz]

Your statement in no way contradicts the one you quoted.

Regarding taking 20 on Disguise: Either interpretation seems equally valid, so check with your DM.I don't see any reason why it shouldn't work, but it would take a long time.

In other words, taking 20 on a Disguise check should take 20(1d3*10) minutes, or between 1 hour 20 minutes and 10 hours. If I were DMing I'd take the average and say it takes 6 hours 40 minutes.

That's for a mundane disguise of course. If a spellcaster had 20 copies of disguise self prepared then it'd take 20 rounds, or 2 minutes. Same for Changelings - shapechange ability is a full-round action right?

Taking 20 assumes there is no penalty for failure AND that the player knows when they have achieved success.

As noted, opposed checks carry a penalty for failure:

An opposed check is a check whose success or failure is determined by comparing the check result to another character’s check result. In an opposed check, the higher result succeeds, while the lower result fails. In case of a tie, the higher skill modifier wins. If these scores are the same, roll again to break the tie.


So neither player may take 20 on opposed rolls as both carry a penalty for failure.

As for someone taking spot checks until they roll a 20 to see if your disguise holds up, as a DM I wouldn't allow blatant metagaming. (Skills being a total abstraction, the character should have no way of knowing they can a) do better, and b) know for certain that if they were to try again they'd see through the disguise. Either they get it on the one try or they don't, and I'd be inclined to make both rolls in secret.)

[Mnemnosyne]

So neither player may take 20 on opposed rolls as both carry a penalty for failure.The quote you posted describes conditions for failure, not a penalty. The possibility of failure is not, in itself, a penalty for failing. A penalty for failure is when something bad happens as a direct result of failing the check.

For example, you can take 20 on a jump check to make a long jump over flat terrain that contains no hazards. Failing carries no penalty; you simply fail to jump as far as you're trying and can try again until you jump the maximum possible distance defined by your stats. You cannot, however, take 20 on a jump check to leap over a chasm, because failing means you fall into the chasm. Similarly, you cannot take 20 on a jump check to make a long jump over flat terrain when you're in a competition, since failing means losing the competition.

Failing a spot check to examine your friend's disguise carries no penalty for failure as a direct result of failing the check. You can spend several minutes carefully scrutinizing your friend's disguise, trying to seek out flaws and problems that you did not see on your first cursory glance. This is taking 20 on your spot check to examine her disguise.

[Dread_Head]

As for someone taking spot checks until they roll a 20 to see if your disguise holds up, as a DM I wouldn't allow blatant metagaming. (Skills being a total abstraction, the character should have no way of knowing they can a) do better, and b) know for certain that if they were to try again they'd see through the disguise. Either they get it on the one try or they don't, and I'd be inclined to make both rolls in secret.)

How is it blatant metagaming for a Changeling to grab a mate and practise his disguise for a few minutes in order to get it as good as possible before going out and using it?

[Wolfepuppy]

I'm not sure how that's metagaming, put on a disguise and let me stare at you for 2 minutes and I'll pick out everything you need to improve on, and I don't even have any ranks in spot lol