Feat to improve Take 10: how good would it have to be?

[Segev]

I found myself contemplating a feat that improves your consistent performance level, and thought initially of one that let you "take 11" instead of just "take 10." This led me to wonder if such a thing is even really worth a feat. So, my question for my fellow playgrounders and optimizers is: How big must X be in the following theoretical feat to make it worth taking?

Take 11
When not rushed or pressured, your normal performance of skilled tasks is consistently better than average.
Prerequisites: None
Benefit: Whenever you take 10, you gain a +X bonus on the check.

[Malphite]

I would argue X would be ten so it matches the take 20 check, which makes the feat worth it in my opinion could be wrong.

[Telonius]

Yeah, I'm trying to imagine a situation where you're not rushed or pressured, and you care about the result, and taking 20 wouldn't an option...

[Segev]

Taking 20 generally means that failure has no consequences, and takes 20x as long. It's simulating rolling 20 times. Taking 10 is "taking average" rather than bothering to roll, and can only be done when you're not stressed/threatened/pressured/particularly rushed. You also can't, without certain class features, take 10 on UMD checks, for example.

[Gabrosin]

A normal Skill Focus feat would grant +3, but applies only to one skill. Several feats provide +2 to two different skills. Of course, these feats are hardly optimal and are rarely seen outside of TO (one skill) builds, or when needed as PrC prereqs.

However, given the various methods for taking 10 on some skill checks even when under duress, this eventually becomes akin to being a free +X to every skill. I'd say anything more than +5 and you're getting into dangerous territory. For a skillmonkey build, even a +2 would make this a strong consideration. Ditto for anyone whose build relies on the combat mobility skills like Balance, Jump, and Tumble.

[Vortenger]

I would say a feat to take 12 instead of ten would seem appropriate. I'm not sure there are many builds that could really utilize even that, but niche builds could find use.

[NecessaryWeevil]

As per the rulebook, the reason to Take 10 is when succeeding by a large amount has no benefit, you expect an average roll will succeed, but you're afraid a low roll will fail. When you care about avoiding failure more than achieving great success, you Take 10.

[Segev]

As per the rulebook, the reason to Take 10 is when succeeding by a large amount has no benefit, you expect an average roll will succeed, but you're afraid a low roll will fail. When you care about avoiding failure more than achieving great success, you Take 10.

And the purpose of this feat would be to hedge that bet against failure, just a little more.

[heavyfuel]

Yeah, I'm trying to imagine a situation where you're not rushed or pressured, and you care about the result, and taking 20 wouldn't an option...

A character with Skill Mastery? Seems really good for a feat to allow you to Take 20 without taking 20 times as long when you combine it with Skill Mastery. It pretty much negates the need of putting more than 1 rank in any skill that doesn't assume you're taking 20 anyway like Open Lock and Search because very few skills other than these have DCs over 25.

Allowing you to Take 20 + Skill Mastery pretty much means you'll always succeed on any skill, ever. Not to mention, it would make it so incredibly easy to beat Epic DCs before you reach Epic Levels.

All in all, make it Take 12. That's what the Savvy Rogue feat does. If someone has both, they can Take 14.