(3.5) Taking ten on concentration

[Illven]

I have a player in a game that wants to take ten on their concentration check. They aren't in battle, but they lack the steady concentration feat.

They have been starving for nine days. By RAW is that distracting or stressful?

[Zanos]

What is this concentration check for? Concentration is usually used specifically to shut out distractions, so I would generally say that you can't take 10 on a roll to not be distracted, since distractions prevent you from taking 10.

[Mr Adventurer]

Yes, I would say 9 days of starvation is stressful and distracting.

[Zanos]

Oh, no. I wouldn't have them make a concentration check for every spellcasting while starving. They would be fatigued->exhausted, of course, and accumulate a bunch of nonlethal damage, but the exhausted condition says nothing about requiring checks.

[Illven]

Greater draconic rite of passage.

[Zanos]

Gonna say the starvation doesn't have anything to do with it, but you can't take 10 on a concentration check, because you're rolling concentration to avoid being distracted to begin with.

You must make a Concentration check whenever you might potentially be distracted (by taking damage, by harsh weather, and so on) while engaged in some action that requires your full attention.

When your character is not being threatened or distracted, you may choose to take 10. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill check, calculate your result as if you had rolled a 10. For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful.

[ryu]

Gonna say the starvation doesn't have anything to do with it, but you can't take 10 on a concentration check, because you're rolling concentration to avoid being distracted to begin with.

Do keep in mind though that you can totally take 10 in any scenario where you're allowed to focus wholly on the task at hand without something else interrupting you. The example literally allows taking 10 on a climb check where failure could mean falling hundreds of feet after all.

[Crake]

I have a player in a game that wants to take ten on their concentration check. They aren't in battle, but they lack the steady concentration feat.

They have been starving for nine days. By RAW is that distracting or stressful?


Greater draconic rite of passage.

You do know that, in a region above 40 degrees F it's only 3 days, right?

But honestly though, considering the check is to enter a deep trance that lasts for 24 hours, I don't see why you wouldn't be able to take 10.


Gonna say the starvation doesn't have anything to do with it, but you can't take 10 on a concentration check, because you're rolling concentration to avoid being distracted to begin with.

You aren't making the check to avoid distractions, you're making the check to focus yourself, similar to how you need to make a concentration check to gain your psionic focus, which you certainly can take 10 on.

[Duke of Urrel]

I'm going to agree with the people who say that you can take 10.

I think distractions are a problem for concentration only if they interrupt you suddenly. For example, you can be startled by a dog in the dark that suddenly jumps up and barks at you (or by a sudden strong gust of wind, a sudden thunderclap, a sudden earthquake, &c.), but you can't be startled by a vacuum cleaner that has already been running for half an hour, even if the noise of the vacuum cleaner is louder. I would say that the continuous discomfort of gnawing hunger is more like the noise of a vacuum cleaner than like the noise of a dog in the dark that suddenly jumps up and barks at you.

But even if you do make a Concentration check and it fails, so that you fail to enter a trance, what is to stop you from trying again? The usual problem with a failed Concentration check is that you lose a spell. But why can't you just try again to enter a trance? (I confess that I know nothing at all about draconic rites of passage.)

[Crake]

I'm going to agree with the people who say that you can take 10.

I think distractions are a problem for concentration only if they interrupt you suddenly. For example, you can be startled by a dog in the dark that suddenly jumps up and barks at you (or by a sudden strong gust of wind, a sudden thunderclap, a sudden earthquake, &c.), but you can't be startled by a vacuum cleaner that has already been running for half an hour, even if the noise of the vacuum cleaner is louder. I would say that the continuous discomfort of gnawing hunger is more like the noise of a vacuum cleaner than like the noise of a dog in the dark that suddenly jumps up and barks at you.

But even if you do make a Concentration check and it fails, so that you fail to enter a trance, what is to stop you from trying again? The usual problem with a failed Concentration check is that you lose a spell. But why can't you just try again to enter a trance? (I confess that I know nothing at all about draconic rites of passage.)

The draconic rite says that if you fail the concentration check, the rite fails and you have to start all over again. It's not quite clear what that actually means, if you need to fast for another 9 (or 3) days, if it consumes the gem to no effect, etc.

[Duke of Urrel]

The draconic rite says that if you fail the concentration check, the rite fails and you have to start all over again. It's not quite clear what that actually means, if you need to fast for another 9 (or 3) days, if it consumes the gem to no effect, etc.

Okay. So there is at least the consequence that you will waste a lot of time and resources if you don't have high enough Concentration skill to pass the ordeal. The question remains: How much Concentration skill should you need to have?

I think some meta-game thinking is in order. How does it affect game balance if we choose to allow or disallow taking 10 on a Concentration check for this purpose?

1. We might allow taking 10 because it seems unbalanced to require a lot of Concentration skill or Constitution to complete the draconic rite. We might suppose that the game designers only meant to require a lengthy pause from dungeon diving as a requirement, in addition to sacrificing an expensive gem.

2. We might forbid taking 10 because good Concentration skill and/or high Constitution is a reasonable thing to require to make you worthy of the benefits that you expect to get from the draconic rite. How useful will it be for the player-character in the future to have high Concentration skill? If this skill would not be useful in the future, it would be inconvenient (and annoying) to have to spend a lot of skill points on this skill alone, merely in order to complete the rite.

In contrast to what I wrote in my previous posting, one may argue that ongoing severe discomfort such as extreme hunger can be a distraction, can require Concentration checks – even repeated Concentration checks, even as often as once per round – and can prohibit taking 10. (This happens when you take continuous damage, for example from the Acid Arrow spell.) So maybe it is reasonable to allow only characters with high Concentration skill to complete the draconic rite. But I think it matters whether we believe that high Concentration skill is a practical thing for the character to have.

[Crake]

Well the DC is 20, and cannot be done before level 6, so anyone with max ranks and at least 12 con can pass it on a take 10.

[Thurbane]

This guide seems to indicate you can take 10 on Concentration checks, at least by one reading: "Can I Take 10?" Table of sourcebook examples/mentions of taking 10 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?355562-quot-Can-I-Take-10-quot-Table-of-sourcebook-examples-mentions-of-taking-10)

[Vaz]

I do not agree with the extrapolations of that thread saying that being able to take 10 simply because it says you can't take 10 is poor logic.

If I said you could not survive a fall off a 40 story building, that doesn't mean you can survive a fall from any other height of building, even though there may be other circumstances which allow you to do so (ie parachute, smaller building etc).

And no, the rite requires the sacrifice of the gem. As in you must sacrifice the Gem, but if you are unsuccessful, you have still sacrificed the gem.

I don't agree that a DC10 Steep Rocky Slope (defined as less than 60degrees) is equitable to a DC20 check, which is an uneven surface woth narrow handholds and footholds or that anything is implied about the height either.

[Jowgen]

I do not agree with the extrapolations of that thread saying that being able to take 10 simply because it says you can't take 10 is poor logic.

The information in this guide is explicitly meant for the purposes of providing text examples that can be used to argue for (or make) a certain decision when the Take 10 question comes up. The explenation collum gives examples of how a piece of text might be used to make an argument based on them, and the "writer wouldn't put in redundant statements" notion happened to be the best apparent way to argue a good number of them. YMMV.

On topic, I personally do not think that Concentration itself forbids you from taking 10, and thus you can apply skill-mastery type abilities to it, but I also think that most situations that call for Concentration checks do incidentally prevent the taking of 10 (as they're generally distracting).

Does starvation qualify as distracting? I don't think it by itself should prevent taking 10 any more than still being at low HP, being ability drained after combat, or being under the effects of a drug. RAW-wise, I don't think you can rule against taking 10 based on this.

That being said, I think it you could reasonably to rule that you can't take 10 for the Draconic Rite, because you can't do so for the Ritual of the Eldeen Druids (PGtE p. 60), which is the only text ever mentioning Concentrating and taking 10 in the same context. This would be an instance of making a ruling on an ambiguous rules situation based on a similar but explicit situation, which isn't by itself RAW, but is IIRC one of the pieces of DMing advice the DMG (or a similar source) gives.

[stanprollyright]

I wouldn't even ask to take 10 on it, much less allow it. Mostly because GDR is powerful, and there are consequences for failure, and that seems like the thing you should roll dice for.

[Crake]

I wouldn't even ask to take 10 on it, much less allow it. Mostly because GDR is powerful, and there are consequences for failure, and that seems like the thing you should roll dice for.

Consequences for failure have never, and should never be used as a reason to disqualify something from being able to take 10, otherwise you get tightrope artists who should be falling down a reasonable amount of the time, or at least stalling, or olympic swimmers who get caughty in mildly rough waters.


That being said, I think it you could reasonably to rule that you can't take 10 for the Draconic Rite, because you can't do so for the Ritual of the Eldeen Druids (PGtE p. 60), which is the only text ever mentioning Concentrating and taking 10 in the same context. This would be an instance of making a ruling on an ambiguous rules situation based on a similar but explicit situation, which isn't by itself RAW, but is IIRC one of the pieces of DMing advice the DMG (or a similar source) gives.

A lot of the time for something like this, if you cannot take 10, it would specifically say so, just like those rituals do. You can't say "This ritual says you can't take 10, so you can't for this other one which has no specification either way", since the default rule is "Unless distracted, threatened, or otherwise stated, you can take 10". You are neither distracted, nor threatened, and the ritual's rule text does not explicitly forbid you from taking 10, so there should be no reason to say you can't.

[ericgrau]

Consequences for failure have never, and should never be used as a reason to disqualify something from being able to take 10, otherwise you get tightrope artists who should be falling down a reasonable amount of the time, or at least stalling, or olympic swimmers who get caughty in mildly rough waters.



A lot of the time for something like this, if you cannot take 10, it would specifically say so, just like those rituals do. You can't say "This ritual says you can't take 10, so you can't for this other one which has no specification either way", since the default rule is "Unless distracted, threatened, or otherwise stated, you can take 10". You are neither distracted, nor threatened, and the ritual's rule text does not explicitly forbid you from taking 10, so there should be no reason to say you can't.
Agreed.

The most common situation preventing you from taking a 10 would be combat. Outside of that I'm always skeptical, because you could always argue that you're in danger but that is clearly not the intent. Looking at the web enhancement the only thing I see involved in the ritual is fasting and trancing. You aren't shoving painful needles in your limbs or anything like that. I'd say you absolutely may take a 10.

... And I think it's obvious. The main thing against it seems to be stinginess which is terrible for the gaming table. When players have to wonder if their basic abilities will work or not, it's highly annoying, argument causing, game delaying, does not actually help as a balancing factor, nor a realism factor. If anything it only makes players either want to play something else that isn't subject to the harsh and boring rule, or give in and get it over with as quickly as possible. "Fine, fine, let's play. I roll. Ok I fail. I eat, I fast. I roll. Ok, a month later, let's get going." You really shouldn't even have to ask if you can take a 10, but unfortunately you often do, and it's not so much harsh as incredibly annoying. In general, just let people take a 10 98% of time outside of combat and move on. We have better things to do with our lives.

Yes this check is an auto-pass with max ranks and 14-2=12 con (remember kobolds have a con penalty), but it's not totally pointless because you need to spend ranks on concentration. And if you use rolled stats or even a reasonable point-buy / assigned stats a 14 con isn't trivial. Or wait a level. Or blow some more days on a retry. Whatever.

Regardless of how powerful the ritual is, making retries as some sort of balancing factor is arbitrarily complicated, largely ineffective and probably never intended. Retrying isn't even the end of the world. If you want to nerf it then nerf it, but it's not a great reason to assume you were supposed to roll concentration.

[Calthropstu]

I have gone over a week without food.

At that point, the only thing on your mind is food. I ultimately broke into someone's car and stole $5 in spare change. It was the most wonderful McDonald's I ever had.

(this was almost 20 years ago)

Starving sucks. It really really sucks. It is really hard to explain to anyone who has never gone through it. But I will say this: I was fully able to function in what I did do. I would not require people to make a concentration check to cast, but I WOULD require a will save to not immediately go after any potential food source.

[stanprollyright]

Regardless of how powerful the ritual is, making retries as some sort of balancing factor is arbitrarily complicated, largely ineffective and probably never intended. Retrying isn't even the end of the world. If you want to nerf it then nerf it, but it's not a great reason to assume you were supposed to roll concentration.

I assume you're supposed to roll concentration from the part where it says "make a concentration check." Taking 10 is a thing for NPCs and routine tasks. This is neither. This is a one-time ritual that makes you fast for 9 days before meditating for 24hrs, which has specific failure and retry conditions. You can't even say you aren't distracted, because the purpose of the check is to avoid distractions while entering your trance. Gods forbid you have to actually roll dice while playing D&D.

[Zanos]

I have gone over a week without food.

At that point, the only thing on your mind is food. I ultimately broke into someone's car and stole $5 in spare change. It was the most wonderful McDonald's I ever had.

(this was almost 20 years ago)

Starving sucks. It really really sucks. It is really hard to explain to anyone who has never gone through it. But I will say this: I was fully able to function in what I did do. I would not require people to make a concentration check to cast, but I WOULD require a will save to not immediately go after any potential food source.
I think there's a difference between willfully fasting and unwillingly starving. Long periods of fasting are common religious practice.

[Calthropstu]

I think there's a difference between willfully fasting and unwillingly starving. Long periods of fasting are common religious practice.

True, but very few such rituals last longer than 48 hours, and most that do merely put a restriction on WHEN food may be eaten and what kind.
Those few that do last longer generally also include total seclusion because, as I said, you will begin to do things you ordinarily would not. Same with going long periods without sleep.
The wizard performing this ritual would need will saves to keep going, not concentration checks. After 9 days, most people would be body checking the door to get food.

[Crake]

Yes this check is an auto-pass with max ranks and 14-2=12 con (remember kobolds have a con penalty), but it's not totally pointless because you need to spend ranks on concentration. And if you use rolled stats or even a reasonable point-buy / assigned stats a 14 con isn't trivial. Or wait a level. Or blow some more days on a retry. Whatever.

Regardless of how powerful the ritual is, making retries as some sort of balancing factor is arbitrarily complicated, largely ineffective and probably never intended. Retrying isn't even the end of the world. If you want to nerf it then nerf it, but it's not a great reason to assume you were supposed to roll concentration.

Don't forget that desert kobolds are a thing, and they don't have con penalty, they get a wis penalty instead.


True, but very few such rituals last longer than 48 hours, and most that do merely put a restriction on WHEN food may be eaten and what kind.
Those few that do last longer generally also include total seclusion because, as I said, you will begin to do things you ordinarily would not. Same with going long periods without sleep.
The wizard performing this ritual would need will saves to keep going, not concentration checks. After 9 days, most people would be body checking the door to get food.

I'd imagine a 6th level, trained, skilled sorcerer who willingly goes on a fast (important distinction, there are many types of fasting, but not all of them necessitate 100% lack of food) for, by the way, 3 days is what it should be if the temperature is more than 40 degrees farenheight (the reason the 9 days is quoted there is because below 40 degrees farenheight kobolds, being cold blooded creatures, have a drastically slowed metabolism, and can survive much longer without food or water, but with other penalties as well) would have much more self discipline than someone seemingly unwilling, unprepared, and young (I assume 20 years ago you were young? :smalltongue:). What you're comparing isn't even close to equatable, and is purely anecdotal, which is to say: Just because that's what you experienced, doesn't mean that's how everyone else will react.

By the way, as someone raised in an orthodox christian home, we would fast for weeks before christmas and easter, but the fasting was not abstaining from all food, it was just meat, fish, eggs, dairy products, wine and oil. The fasting is never properly outlined in the article, so we have no idea what exactly is happening, whether the kobold is completely abstaining from food and water for 72 hours, or whether he is allow drink, or whether he is allowed basic sustenance at all.

[P.F.]

As a counter-anecdote, I have gone ten days without eating any food as a fast for purity. I was certainly not starving. After about the third or fourth day I did not experience any more stomach pain or irritability. I was not obsessively or constantly preoccupied with food; indeed, I became acutely aware of what a large proportion of time is spent in the pursuit, preparation, serving, and consumption of food.

Keep in mind that I was surrounded by food at the time, free for the taking, and was not concerned about an impending famine or uncertain about when I might eat again if I so chose. I found the experience quite enjoyable, although difficult and at times uncomfortable. I would compare it favorably with jumping into an icy lake, or an intense workout at the gym.

I did, however, drink water and tea during this fast. I do not typically abstain from drinking water because I believe this to be an unhealthy practice. However, as a spiritual exercise in self-denial and compassion, I understand some cultures find benefit in doing so. My understanding is that extreme thirst/dehydration can induce hallucination, delusion, and panic, which might prevent taking 10 on a concentration check.