D&D General "I make a perception check."

[Chaosmancer]

There has been A LOT of clarification in the thread since this post you quoted, so I will make it short:

You describe what you do and how you do it. I respond with information, and maybe require a roll. Generally speaking, things that are easily perceived don't require a roll and things that are hidden might, depending on how you detailed your actions.

Moreover, the WHOLE thing (for me) is based simply on this: players cannot just throw dice and say they made a perception roll. That is not how the game works.

I have been seeing a lot of clarification as the thread moved on, but I think it also highlights the reasons why the players may absolutely say "I make a perception check."

If I tell the DM "I look around the room" I am describing only part of what a perception check is. I have described what my character is doing, but there are suddenly holes. For example, is my character also listening? Right now I am typing this post, but I also can hear Brooklyn-99 playing in the other room. They are having some scene going on, the captain is talking. I wasn't "actively" listening to it, I just heard it because the room is quiet.

Additionally, quite a few people have said that "I look around the room" isn't enough to even trigger a visual perception check. Because they already did look around the room. And in fact, they must declare an even more specific set of actions, such as "I look in the shadowy corners" or "I look for the cup", which again, leads straight into the question. Since they didn't say they are looking for the scrape marks on the floor, do they not even have a chance of seeing them?

And so the player is declaring an action that covers their bases. They are rolling perception, to engage four or five of their senses, to attempt to find something out of the ordinary. This is the safe option, because they don't only want the the visual information, they want the auditory and olfactory information as well. They don't only want to look for hidden enemies, but also secret doors, hidden treasure, and clues to what is further in the dungeon. But rather than list off everything individually, they are making a declaration that sums all of that action into a single sentence.

And frankly, other than limiting my visual information to "I am looking for only X" I don't know how else to make looking an action, other than to say "I look"

///////////////////////////////////////

Additionally, I have seen some conversation about hiding spots guaranteeing success. A particular example was the Paladin hiding in a pantry, and auto-succeeding because they are completely concealed. However, I can say with a lot of certainty, that isn't how the rules work. Because if you are invisible, you are completely concealed, yet you are not hidden until you make a stealth check. And blindsense stills "sees" you because you cannot be hidden if they have a "clear line of sight" to you.

A high degree of concealment is required to even make a stealth roll, and rewarding a character with a low stealth while penalizing a character with a high stealth, based on decisions that have nothing to do with how good their characters can hide, seems counter-intuitive. It makes it seem like the skills shouldn't even be a thing, because they aren't what is determining my success and failure. The skills are there because they should drive success and failure, and it is a balancing act, between player engagement in the narrative and the character's skills, but auto-passes end up being dangerous the more often they can happen because the player knows how the DM designs.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

But it sounds like your declarations are in the form of asking to make ability checks which essentially skips describing what you want to do. It gets to the roll with some built in assumptions as to the character's action at which point the DM can confirm or deny the roll.

I don't have a 1 way to declare. not as a Player or a DM...

so in the same night a rogue checking for traps might do the following:

"I take out my gear and go to work" then describe in depth a search roll
"traps?" hold up a d20
"you know" hold up a d20
"Can I just perception for traps"

or any combination.

all I ask for is for your intent to be understood by both me and you...

sometimes I get it wrong.
maybe they get to a door after a fight where they captured a succubus and the rogue holds up a d20 and says "you know" and I by mistake say "Yup roll perception to find traps" and he says "No... persuasion" and I go "I'm sorry you want to persuade the door?" and he come back with "No i'm not stupid... I want to seduce the succubus."
now I may have to argue how stupid he is but that can happen

 

[GMforPowergamers]

If you are right, and without watching his process of play I can't know that, then he's not adapted the process of play so far that I'm wrong. He's still going to have player skill matter and mental and social skills will still be different than physical skills.

again... I not only am not perfect about it but I doubt anyone can be. I can even tell you times this year that I made mistakes or let player game me... my goal os to minimize player skill and maximize character skill

the fact that my groups are more or less in agreement makes it easier.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

If that is true, it's extra steps for no gain. You're better off saying "I hide in the closet" and leaving it at that.

that's fine... the pally can say that. now roll stealth

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Once again, I have to lament WotC's word choice

I keep being told it is a lamons reading just common ussage so that is what I go with

 

[Shiroiken]

I think an important aspect overlooked sometimes is asking why they want to make a check. In 4E and 5E you have passive Perception, and in 3E you have "taking the 10" to create a similar result, so unless the character is specifically expecting something, there's no reason to roll. If they're trying to do something specific, they should say so.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

That sounds like a goal and an approach to me. No more specific detail is required, because you’ve stated clearly and with reasonable specificity what you want to accomplish (prevent the goblin from getting away) and what your character does to try and accomplish it (tie him up). I would probably not even require you to make a check to accomplish that successfully.

neitehr would I... something we agree on

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I'm using some jargon here, which of course you aren't expected to necessarily know. It would be a long side discussion to define the terms.

But before we go any further, it's a bias of mine but when I read text that is poorly punctuated and filled with misspellings in a conversation like this that on the other end of the conversation the person is just shaking with rage and cursing at the screen. Please tell me that you are just typing on the phone or something, or if you are actually as agitated as your text looks to me, I'll stop replying for a few hours and let you calm down.

I am a bitt erratated... but I am also dumb, bad at spelling, have big fat thumbs and yes am on my phone... so some of that is anger but not much

I've written more text than is probably good for me on EnWorld

something else we have in common

When I bring "railroading" into the conversation, it's not because I don't understand the term. I literally mean go read my essay on it the subject and see which of the techniques are familiar to you.

For example, you responded to me by saying sometimes you fast forward through combats... and suddenly we have yet another railroading technique from my essay turning up as part of your process of play. So I'm even more curious now about your aesthetics of play, because unlike a lot of people I don't use "railroading" as pejorative.

okay. I try tto 'read the room' (sometimes it's just easy to ask) and if players just want to skip the bandit fight I let them each make a prime stat roll against a DC and the higher they get the better it came out for them, but in no way do they loose that fight.

I have had some jokers try to pull that on BBEGs and be told "No, you don't auto win this one"

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Again, you did that, that was the passive Perception check. If you want to do something other than look around, you have to say what that is.

Not if you stop trying to think of it in terms of “what do I have to say to get the DM to let me use Skill X?” and start thinking of it in terms of “what do I want to accomplish and what do I do to try and accomplish it?”

okay...

what do I want to accomplish: My character was warned of danger and I want to check out the room to make sure it is safe
What do I do to try and accomplish it: I look for danger...

the problem is "How do you look?" "I don't know...need some help here, my character has skills can I fall back on those"

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I think an important aspect overlooked sometimes is asking why they want to make a check. In 4E and 5E you have passive Perception, and in 3E you have "taking the 10" to create a similar result, so unless the character is specifically expecting something, there's no reason to roll. If they're trying to do something specific, they should say so.

right so if the DM asks why and the player says "to be sure I looked real good..."