Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Crawford on Stealth
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Majoru Oakheart" data-source="post: 7099920" data-attributes="member: 5143"><p>When I used to play 2e, due to the lack of perception skills, every room became "I search behind the door. Nothing? Behind the curtains. Nothing? Under the rug. Still nothing?"</p><p></p><p>After skills were introduced in 3e and we allowed players to say "I search the room, I get a 20 on my search check, what do I find?" it felt like a weight was lifted our chests as we weren't constantly specifying every place we looked. We had a die roll that determined how good our character was at remembering to search behind the curtains. If we rolled low, our characters didn't think to do so or got impatient and stopped searching the room partway through, convinced there was nothing there.</p><p></p><p>It allowed us to easily search a room in 2 seconds: "I search the room...I get a 20." "You find nothing" rather than it taking 20 or 30 minutes sometimes to search one room.</p><p></p><p>But it's fairly obvious that among the designers there are some that prefer the older method of "You need to tell me exactly where you are searching" and some that prefer the newer method of "Your dice determine where you look". Because of that, the PHB treats perception and searching very vaguely in order for each DM to run it the way they want to.</p><p></p><p>Which is fine, but it does create a lot of confusion at tables when some players/DM think it works one way and some think it works the other. It creates even more confusion when the writers of adventures think it works one way and some think it works the other...without really specifying which way they are writing it for.</p><p></p><p></p><p>These are good examples of what I talk about above. Some authors expect the players to specify "I look under the bed" and some expect that some players will say "I search the room" and give them a chance of finding something under the bed.</p><p></p><p>This is especially true in a couple of cases where I've seen text like "PCs can find a trap door under the rug in the middle of the room with a DC 10 Wisdom (Perception) check but it is plainly visible if the rug is moved."</p><p></p><p>Using one method of running the game, that Perception check means absolutely nothing. You can't see the trap door unless you move the rug. If you don't specify you are moving the rug, you can never succeed in that check. If you do move the rug, you see it without a check/high enough passive.</p><p></p><p>I've taken to running things like that by assuming the rug is slightly askew and part of the trap door is visible, but a small enough part that it takes a check to see it. Of course, often these checks are listed as DC 10, which means everyone who enters the room who doesn't have lower than 10 Wisdom immediately spots the trap door.</p><p></p><p>Which is my problem with PP being always on. You might as well not have hidden items at all since 90% of parties have at least one PC with a PP of 13 or higher. So, when an adventure says DC 13 or below, it will be found almost 100% of the time. If it says 14, it'll be found about 75% of the time. If it says 15, it'll be found about 50% of the time. If it says over 15, it'll be found almost never. The other numbers don't matter.</p><p></p><p>Which is why I liked Mike Mearls solution of having the DM roll stealth checks for things like traps and hidden doors to provide the variability of making rolls while still allowing the DM to avoid the players metagaming by having them make the roles.</p><p></p><p>The only way around this is to cover everything so that the PCs don't see anything at all unless they look in or behind everything. Then we are back to the "Gotcha!" style of play where you can say "Sorry, you didn't find the key because you said you were searching the cupboard but no one said they looked BEHIND the jar in the cupboard."</p><p></p><p>I tend to prefer a balance between the two where if the players say "I search the room", they get rolls to determine which places they may have looked and how thoroughly they've searched the room but if they say "I search behind the jar in the cupboard" they succeed with no rolls required. </p><p></p><p>But PP prevents this from working because it removes the randomness of the roll and makes them automatically find almost everything in the room by saying "I search the room", making specifying where you are searching completely pointless.</p><p></p><p>Also, if you can make active rolls, it removes the benefit of having PP by having players say "I find nothing in the cupboard? I search again. I rolled a 12. I search again. I get a 15. I search again..." until they roll a natural 20.</p><p></p><p>So now, you have the worst of all worlds: Players have incentive to specify that they are searching everywhere, since being specific means possibly guaranteed success. Players have incentive to keep rolling over and over again when the DM tells them they don't see anything. Also, all DCs 13 or below are completely useless.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Majoru Oakheart, post: 7099920, member: 5143"] When I used to play 2e, due to the lack of perception skills, every room became "I search behind the door. Nothing? Behind the curtains. Nothing? Under the rug. Still nothing?" After skills were introduced in 3e and we allowed players to say "I search the room, I get a 20 on my search check, what do I find?" it felt like a weight was lifted our chests as we weren't constantly specifying every place we looked. We had a die roll that determined how good our character was at remembering to search behind the curtains. If we rolled low, our characters didn't think to do so or got impatient and stopped searching the room partway through, convinced there was nothing there. It allowed us to easily search a room in 2 seconds: "I search the room...I get a 20." "You find nothing" rather than it taking 20 or 30 minutes sometimes to search one room. But it's fairly obvious that among the designers there are some that prefer the older method of "You need to tell me exactly where you are searching" and some that prefer the newer method of "Your dice determine where you look". Because of that, the PHB treats perception and searching very vaguely in order for each DM to run it the way they want to. Which is fine, but it does create a lot of confusion at tables when some players/DM think it works one way and some think it works the other. It creates even more confusion when the writers of adventures think it works one way and some think it works the other...without really specifying which way they are writing it for. These are good examples of what I talk about above. Some authors expect the players to specify "I look under the bed" and some expect that some players will say "I search the room" and give them a chance of finding something under the bed. This is especially true in a couple of cases where I've seen text like "PCs can find a trap door under the rug in the middle of the room with a DC 10 Wisdom (Perception) check but it is plainly visible if the rug is moved." Using one method of running the game, that Perception check means absolutely nothing. You can't see the trap door unless you move the rug. If you don't specify you are moving the rug, you can never succeed in that check. If you do move the rug, you see it without a check/high enough passive. I've taken to running things like that by assuming the rug is slightly askew and part of the trap door is visible, but a small enough part that it takes a check to see it. Of course, often these checks are listed as DC 10, which means everyone who enters the room who doesn't have lower than 10 Wisdom immediately spots the trap door. Which is my problem with PP being always on. You might as well not have hidden items at all since 90% of parties have at least one PC with a PP of 13 or higher. So, when an adventure says DC 13 or below, it will be found almost 100% of the time. If it says 14, it'll be found about 75% of the time. If it says 15, it'll be found about 50% of the time. If it says over 15, it'll be found almost never. The other numbers don't matter. Which is why I liked Mike Mearls solution of having the DM roll stealth checks for things like traps and hidden doors to provide the variability of making rolls while still allowing the DM to avoid the players metagaming by having them make the roles. The only way around this is to cover everything so that the PCs don't see anything at all unless they look in or behind everything. Then we are back to the "Gotcha!" style of play where you can say "Sorry, you didn't find the key because you said you were searching the cupboard but no one said they looked BEHIND the jar in the cupboard." I tend to prefer a balance between the two where if the players say "I search the room", they get rolls to determine which places they may have looked and how thoroughly they've searched the room but if they say "I search behind the jar in the cupboard" they succeed with no rolls required. But PP prevents this from working because it removes the randomness of the roll and makes them automatically find almost everything in the room by saying "I search the room", making specifying where you are searching completely pointless. Also, if you can make active rolls, it removes the benefit of having PP by having players say "I find nothing in the cupboard? I search again. I rolled a 12. I search again. I get a 15. I search again..." until they roll a natural 20. So now, you have the worst of all worlds: Players have incentive to specify that they are searching everywhere, since being specific means possibly guaranteed success. Players have incentive to keep rolling over and over again when the DM tells them they don't see anything. Also, all DCs 13 or below are completely useless. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Crawford on Stealth
Top