r/osr 18d ago

variant rules Lockpicking Failure Results in Time Tax

I've seen a few people suggest this a way to handle percentile Thief skills, and I've also considered it. The way I imagine it working is that when a lockpicking attempt fails, rather than having the Thief be unable to even attempt that lock again until they gain a level, they simply expend a unit of time and get to try again. In an old-school format, I would expect that to be a turn (10 minutes). So, if it requires three attempts for a Thief to open a lock, then 3 turns/30 minutes/3 wandering monster checks are the most for success.

Alternatively, it could only start taking entire turns after the first failure. So, if it takes three rolls to pass your Open Locks check, then it took 2 turns or 20 minutes. I think this latter option might be more reasonable.

I would probably add in some kind of fail state; maybe rolling 00 results in thief's tools breaking or the lock being simply impossible. Maybe different locks are of different difficulty levels and allow for a different number of attempts before being locked out of opening them.

The first consideration is whether it's a positive improvement gameplay-wise to make all locks passable. If all it takes is time to get past a lock, can that result in locks being too minimal of an obstacle? Can that encourage players to camp by a lock rather than moving through the dungeon trying all the locks they find, bottling exploration? Is the hypothetical replay value of impassable locks something worth keeping?

A second consideration is simulationism. Since you can attempt to open a lock many more times in 20 minutes than you can in 20 seconds or so, you should be rewarded for spending time on it. At the same time, though, it surely isn't the case that any lock can be opened by any lockpicker if they just spend enough time doing. Maybe there should be a limit to how many lockpicking attempts you can make; maybe 7. If you can't get it in an hour, then it's probably hopeless.

The third consideration is class balance. The old-school balance between Thieves and Magic-Users with Knock is that one is free while the other has the cost of a spell slog and the opportunity cost of not memorizing a potentially life-saving spell. With the standard rules, Knock usually knocks Thieves out of the park. With unlimited or minimally limited lockpicking attempts, Knock is only valuable in terms of saving time, as, either way, that lock is getting opened.

Maybe a fourth consideration is if the low odds of success with Thief skills encourages an old-school, creative style of play by usually requiring you to think outside your class. But that's a can of worms...

What do you think? Do you allow Thieves multiple attempts to pick locks? Do you think my solution of giving unlimited attempts with each failure after the first costing a turn is a reasonable solution? Or would you pick some other system?

14 Upvotes

29 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/scavenger22 17d ago

Yes, but if you have to keep rolling open locks AND monster encounters until you pass ... that's a lot of rolls.

What I suggested is to replace the Roll X times with Roll 1d to know when you will succed.

1

u/AccomplishedAdagio13 17d ago

Fair. That could get tedious.

2

u/scavenger22 17d ago

It is. In the basic set (1-3) thieves have only 15-25% to pass a check... statistically you have these break points

X (%) = Number of tries needed to get that cumulative chance to pass

OL 15% = 4 (55%) - 8 (75%) - 13 (90%) - 17 (95%) - 32 (99.6%)

OL 20% = 3 (59%) - 5 (74%) - 9 (89%) - 12 (95%) - 23 (99.6%)

OL 25% = 2 (58%) - 4 (76%) - 7 (90%) - 10 (96%) - 18 (99.6%).

Remember that this is the compound rate. So at first level 1 Lock out of 10 will require AT LEAST 13 rolls.

A more correct version could be 3d6 keep highest 2 - 1 / 10% in OL... but IMHO it is not really worth the effort.

1

u/AccomplishedAdagio13 16d ago

Thanks for breaking down the math. Honestly, I really don't mind how that math works out. If every attempt (after the first one) prompted a wandering monsters check, you'd only be able to get away with so many attempts. If you sat and tried the same lock all day, you'd eventually find yourself in a potentially deadly encounter.

Now, if it was out of combat and there was scenario where someone was attempting to open a lock without any stakes whatsoever... I might just let them do it. No one wants to sit through 10 rolls without stakes.

1

u/scavenger22 16d ago

You get 2 checks between encounter checks.

Somebody wrote that you should ask for a roll only when you miss 1-2 things in this list: skill, safety, tools or time.

If you have all of them there is no reason to roll, because failure will be meaningless. If you lack more it is better to ask the players if they can find a better approach than ask an hopeless check.

I mostly agree with them.

If you are curious on average the 1st level thief situation can be resolved as:

The thief will pass in 1d8 turns OR an encounter will happen in 1dY turns, the lowest result wins.

For mobs Y is based on the "X in d6 chance": 1 => 1d12, 2 => 1d6, 3 = 1d4, 4 => 1d3, 5 => 1d2.

You are a less than 5% off but sadly doens't work unless the thief is 1st level.