Arcane Mastery in combat?

[fallensavior]

Arcane Mastery says "You can take 10 on caster level checks (as if the caster level check was a skill check)." (CA 73)

General skill rules say "When your character is not being threatened or distracted, you may choose to take 10." (PHB 65)

Prima facie, it would seem RAW is no, you may not use Arcane Mastery when in combat (or otherwise threatened or distracted), because that's how taking ten works. (And the feat doesn't just say "you may take ten," it says to take ten the same way that you do with skills.)

On the other hand, does anyone ever roll caster level checks outside of a confrontation? Wouldn't the feat be completely worthless if you can't use it in combat?

[Khedrac]

Out of combat dispels - which can be a right pain if you need to roll a 10 and the dice don't favour you.

Also, note that Notdetection uses a caster level check (as so does the amulet thereof) so scrying could well involve CL checks.

I agree that it's probably not worth a feat for these though.

[Goaty14]

I mean, it's not *completely* useless for the above reasons, but if I took it (and couldn't use it in combat), I wouldn't accept anything less than a bonus feat on a platter.

[Nifft]

Activating a higher-level scroll can require a caster level check. That's a thing you might do out of combat, with an expensive resurrection scroll for example. It would suck to miss that check.

[Otomodachi]

Personally I'd ask my DM if "threatened or distracted" could mean LITERALLY threatened (as in in a threatened square) or under a status effect like dazzled etc. Seems about right to me.

[fallensavior]

Is the consensus that "When your character is not being threatened or distracted," applies, but is open to interpretation? Do a lot of groups ignore that aspect?

[Nifft]

Is the consensus that "When your character is not being threatened or distracted," applies, but is open to interpretation? Do a lot of groups ignore that aspect?

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/usingSkills.htm#taking10


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. Distractions or threats (such as combat) make it impossible for a character to take 10. In most cases, taking 10 is purely a safety measure —you know (or expect) that an average roll will succeed but fear that a poor roll might fail, so you elect to settle for the average roll (a 10). Taking 10 is especially useful in situations where a particularly high roll wouldn’t help.


Combat is called out as explicitly distracting & threatening.

In general, there's a vague consensus across groups I've personally seen that when time is being measured round-by-round, you can't take 10. You can generally take 10 in other circumstances. So in dramatic chase scenes, you can't take 10. If you have 3 rounds of prep time before an ambush, you can't take 10. But if you have 10 minutes of prep time, you can take 10.

It's vague but it's the pattern that I've observed -- albeit that's just my personal observations, and my sample size is a rather small minority of all games.

[Troacctid]

Is the consensus that "When your character is not being threatened or distracted," applies, but is open to interpretation? Do a lot of groups ignore that aspect?
I would think that they do. The descriptive text of the feat itself seems to imply that it is intended to work in combat.

[jdizzlean]

I would think that they do. The descriptive text of the feat itself seems to imply that it is intended to work in combat.

I would agree that you can use it in combat, otherwise there would be no point in taking it as otherwise you could simply take 10 per normal. I think it was explicitly created to be used in combat.

[NineInchNall]

I mean ...

*sigh*


Page 73: Arcane Mastery
You can use this feat even while under stress.

[fallensavior]

I mean ...

*sigh*

Ah, that solves that. Thanks.

[Doctor Awkward]

Is the consensus that "When your character is not being threatened or distracted," applies, but is open to interpretation? Do a lot of groups ignore that aspect?

To elaborate, combat in 3rd Edition D&D is one giant abstraction of the actual process. The rules make a number of underlying assumptions regarding character behavior that allow it to function as written, including but not necessarily limited to:

-All combatants are assumed to occupy a number of 5-foot squares as is indicated by their size, down to a minimum of one. This space allows them to make use of their Dexterity modifier to armor class, and swing whatever weapon they are wielding without penalty.

-All combatants are assumed to be constantly checking the condition of the battlefield within their line of sight at all times during the combat round. This is why there is no "facing" in 3rd Edition, and why you (normally) only gain a bonus when you and an ally threaten opposite squares on an enemy.

-All combatants are assumed to be carefully noting the actions of every enemy within the reach of their weapon. This is what allows you to note "momentary lapses in guard" and make attacks of opportunity, and why the list of such actions that cause lapses in concentration is quite specific.

It's for these reasons and more that combat is always and automatically considered to be a "distraction" that would prevent you from applying sufficient concentration to your skill check to enable you to Take 10.

[Mordaedil]

I mean ...

*sigh*

Talk about fatal omission from text.