Quickness & Master Plan Alternative

[Taliesin]

Again I point out, if there is no check at all, quickness doesn't apply as equally as it does not to tasks you cannot take 20 at.

You made that one up. Of course you can take Quickness on tasks for which there are no checks...say, reading a book that's written in a language you comprehend.

[EPIC]

Again I point out, if there is no check at all, quickness doesn't apply as equally as it does not to tasks you cannot take 20 at.

You made that one up. Of course you can take Quickness on tasks for which there are no checks...say, reading a book that's written in a language you comprehend.

Fair enough I suppose, though it could be seen as a check of some sort to actually retain what was read. Either way, speed reading a book doesn't provide a pl breaking bonus. But, the intelligence check is the planning part of master plan, it equates to the design process of inventing

So there's no specific pre-planning that you aren't making a check for. The entire act of planning is what the int check is for, not just a 3 second 'eureka' moment.

[Taliesin]

Oh, I could see and agree from a PL-breaking POV that you couldn't use Quickness on Master Plan, but strictly read, I can't find any difference between that and Design. There is a penalty for failing the Design check for Inventions, too--the invention won't work, but Quickness is permitted all the same. And there isn't any specific PL limitation on inventions either, AFAIK.

[EPIC]

Oh, I could see and agree from a PL-breaking POV that you couldn't use Quickness on Master Plan, but strictly read, I can't find any difference between that and Design. There is a penalty for failing the Design check for Inventions, too--the invention won't work, but Quickness is permitted all the same. And there isn't any specific PL limitation on inventions either, AFAIK.

Hmm, I think you are right. Invention/artificer don't specify that the created devices are limited by pl, likely in part because they are balanced in taking so long to build, even with the quickened design time
Also in the limited use of said object.

Though invention design checks and master plan share the same issue for failed checks in that they don't work, inventions can even backfire.
To be honest, in my opinion, master plan should be using a tactics check rather than raw int, boost the dcs by 5 each and since knowledge checks can take 20, you can use quickness.
Relaying the message though should be a move action, similar to issuing orders to a minion

[Paragon]

Again I point out, if there is no check at all, quickness doesn't apply as equally as it does not to tasks you cannot take 20 at.

I'm not sure where you're getting that from; Quickness can be applied to all sorts of things that have no check at all applied. For example, packing a box would not normally require a check of any sort, but you could certainly use Quickness for it.

[Taliesin]

Oh, I could see and agree from a PL-breaking POV that you couldn't use Quickness on Master Plan, but strictly read, I can't find any difference between that and Design. There is a penalty for failing the Design check for Inventions, too--the invention won't work, but Quickness is permitted all the same. And there isn't any specific PL limitation on inventions either, AFAIK.

Hmm, I think you are right. Invention/artificer don't specify that the created devices are limited by pl, likely in part because they are balanced in taking so long to build, even with the quickened design time
Also in the limited use of said object.

Though invention design checks and master plan share the same issue for failed checks in that they don't work, inventions can even backfire.
To be honest, in my opinion, master plan should be using a tactics check rather than raw int, boost the dcs by 5 each and since knowledge checks can take 20, you can use quickness.
Relaying the message though should be a move action, similar to issuing orders to a minion

Sure, that's the Masterful Tactics option from Mastermind's Manual.

But you're wrong that Knowledge checks differ from Int checks on taking 20. If conditions prohibit you from taking 20 on an Int check (time, failure), then they also prevent you from taking 20 on a Knowledge check. The main thing that Quickness ameliorates is the time factor; if there are consequences for failure, you still can't take 20, even on a Knowledge check.

For example, if you have a power set up with the Check Required Flaw (Knowledge), say, Magic (Check Required [Knowledge Arcane Lore]), then you can't take 20 on the Knowledge check.

[EPIC]

@Paragon

I am getting that for the wording of the power in UP where "A routine task is anything where you could take 20 on the check". But I'm looking it now as any mundane task without an associated check, like your packing of the box, could be considered a 'check', a raw 20. Packing said box could be done hastily or efficiently. Generally, people jus ttake their time to make sure everything goes in, thus the taking of 20. I know it sounds kinda stupid, but "any task you can take 20 on" really doesn't leave much to the imagination.

@Taliesin

I think you misunderstood me a little bit. I didn't mean that you can always take 20 on a Knowledge check, just that you CAN if circumstances allow, such as researching or being in no particular rush to rummage through your memories.

[Dr.Nova]

Such spirited debate!

Honestly, this seems like a terribly murky subject anyway you look at it. According to the link on Steve's answer, all I got out of it was you can't take 20 on Master Plan, and therefore not use quickness in the way most people would: To take 20 on a check at a super-reduced time frame. That's just my interpretation of it though because the answer is so brief there is no definitive answer to mandate a set-in-stone rule (which is a good thing). I agree wholeheartedly that taking twenty on a check that breaks PL should not be allowed. However there are some other interests not addressed here.

There is a staggering issue with this debate: STORY/CHARACTER THEME

If a character is supposed to be designed to have a great mental prowess and think on a much faster level than normal people, its hard to justify them taking as long to formulate a plan as someone that thinks and performs mental tasks at ten times or more their own speed. You see this sort of quick thinking brilliance in comics and other entertainment quite often: Watchmen's Ozymandias, Naruto's Shikimaru Nara, Sherlock Holmes (in his new movie) and probably best exemplified (if crudely) by the "Brain Blasts" of Nickelodeon's Jimmy Neutron.

Now for some common sense (which I know is subjective at best). Normally, people THINK faster than they TALK. Given that, it still would take time to explain a plan to others for them to benefit from it. You can feasibly plan a heist in an afternoon, but to explain it to a team and prepare them for it can take weeks. Another thing to consider (which is what everyone has possibly forgotten) is Master Plan specifically prohibits use during combat or surprise encounters. With these limitations in place, the feat still takes a few minutes to work its effect so the "planning phase" becomes more flavor-text in that sense and is really moot to a hyper-intelligent character, but hindering to a slower-witted tactician. Which really makes a lot of sense when you think about it. It should still take time to work, but maybe not as long to those that think and perceive at light-speed.

I'll admit to being biased. I believe that Story should always trump Mechanics (for better or worse). However, I also use my preference to reward great use of imagination and role-playing. I had a player that wanted to use Master Plan in the middle of a battle by manipulating the terrain around them to his party's advantage. He needed to know how to re-arrange the field, and I let him have it (but it cost him a full round and a Hero Point). Do what you gotta do, but at least make sure its fun.

[Paragon]

@Paragon

I am getting that for the wording of the power in UP where "A routine task is anything where you could take 20 on the check". But I'm looking it now as any mundane task without an associated check, like your packing of the box, could be considered a 'check', a raw 20. Packing said box could be done hastily or efficiently. Generally, people jus ttake their time to make sure everything goes in, thus the taking of 20. I know it sounds kinda stupid, but "any task you can take 20 on" really doesn't leave much to the imagination.

The problem is that you're focusing on "task". There are lots of things you can do this on that don't even have a difficulty for them. Really, its better to look at it the other way: you can't use Quickness on anything that requires a check and that you can't take 20 on. Pretty much anything else you can.

[EPIC]

@Paragon

I am getting that for the wording of the power in UP where "A routine task is anything where you could take 20 on the check". But I'm looking it now as any mundane task without an associated check, like your packing of the box, could be considered a 'check', a raw 20. Packing said box could be done hastily or efficiently. Generally, people jus ttake their time to make sure everything goes in, thus the taking of 20. I know it sounds kinda stupid, but "any task you can take 20 on" really doesn't leave much to the imagination.

The problem is that you're focusing on "task". There are lots of things you can do this on that don't even have a difficulty for them. Really, its better to look at it the other way: you can't use Quickness on anything that requires a check and that you can't take 20 on. Pretty much anything else you can.

If you can't use Quickness on anything that requires a check, that kinda cuts out things you can take 20 on as well doesn't it? I think it's probably best to just use common sense.

[Taliesin]

@Paragon

I am getting that for the wording of the power in UP where "A routine task is anything where you could take 20 on the check". But I'm looking it now as any mundane task without an associated check, like your packing of the box, could be considered a 'check', a raw 20. Packing said box could be done hastily or efficiently. Generally, people jus ttake their time to make sure everything goes in, thus the taking of 20. I know it sounds kinda stupid, but "any task you can take 20 on" really doesn't leave much to the imagination.

The problem is that you're focusing on "task". There are lots of things you can do this on that don't even have a difficulty for them. Really, its better to look at it the other way: you can't use Quickness on anything that requires a check and that you can't take 20 on. Pretty much anything else you can.

If you can't use Quickness on anything that requires a check, that kinda cuts out things you can take 20 on as well doesn't it? I think it's probably best to just use common sense.

Read the rest of Paragon's sentence (bolded). He didn't just say you can't use Quickness on anything that requires a check. He said anything that requires a check and that you can't take 20 on.

The idea is to look at what you can't use Quickness on, rather than what you can use it on. It's more exhaustive to look at everything you can use it on but probably easier restrict it on an exception basis.

Basically triage the task:

1. Does it require a check?
a. Yes. Go to Question 2.
b. No. You can use Quickness.
2. Can you take 20 on the check? (i.e., Is it routine? Are there no penalties for failure?)
a. Yes. You can use Quickness.
b. No. You cannot use Quickness.

[EPIC]

Yeah, I was still sleepy when i made that post. I see it now. And I think your flow chart is actually the perfect method for dealing with Quickness.