D&D General What's wrong with Perception?

[James Gasik]

Yep. You do, in fact, have to inspect the building to understand how it is put together. Go figure.



Oh, you mean, like is already provided for in the rules, if you want it?

Spoiler: Longish quote from PHB Pg 175

"Variant: Skills with Different Abilities​

Normally, your proficiency in a skill applies only to a specific kind of ability check. Proficiency in Athletics, for example, usually applies to Strength checks. In some situations, though, your proficiency might reasonably apply to a different kind of check. In such cases, the DM might ask for a check using an unusual combination of ability and skill, or you might ask your DM if you can apply a proficiency to a different check. For example, if you have to swim from an offshore island to the mainland, your DM might call for a Constitution check to see if you have the stamina to make it that far. In this case, your DM might allow you to apply your proficiency in Athletics and ask for a Constitution (Athletics) check. So if you're proficient in Athletics, you apply your proficiency bonus to the Constitution check just as you would normally do for a Strength (Athletics) check. Similarly, when your half-‐‑orc barbarian uses a display of raw strength to intimidate an enemy, your DM might ask for a Strength (Intimidation) check, even though Intimidation is normally associated with Charisma."

Yeah, exactly like that. I knew it was a variant, but I haven't met anyone else who uses it.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't see a problem with Perception for me. On some characters I take it, on others I don't. I don't particularly have more fun on the perceptive characters vs. ones good at other skills. It's definitely a top tier skill, but I don't find it radically more valuable than Stealth or Persuasion, or various others depending on the table.

Again half the problem is that Perception is on of the few skills usable in the combat pillar.

5e, doesn't have "Roll Intimidate to demoralize the foe and get an advantage" or "Roll Heal to end poison" like 3e or 4e did as a standard rule used at many tables.

And combat is a pillar that has the most rolls per PC.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

This is related to the fact that a lot of skills are basically trash & PCs don't have the budget for trash skills. Perception is almost always going to be useful to some degree. How often have you seen entire campaigns run without ever having someone use medicine/nature/handle animal history or performane? Out of the times those skills even come up in a campaign are they regularly important to any degree? Sure bob might tame a wild animal or use handle animal with a horse but was a possible failure going to have much more impact than "ok.. moving on" or something in even half of those cases?

Yes, this is more or less my issue.

Initiative as a skill, and certainly Perception, is clear, specific, and consistent in its applicability. Perception is useful whenever you are in an environment where you don't necessarily know all the information...which is literally all environments ever. Initiative is useful whenever you are in an environment where combat can break out...which is pretty much all environments. And, contrary to DND_Reborn's claim, I fully disagree that Initiative is unimportant in 5e, regardless of level: the people who go first have the opportunity to kill opponents or drop debuffs on their enemies, leading to a force-multiplying effect: the people who go first are more likely to gain ground early, which makes them more likely to gain further ground later. Or, to analogize to another game, White has a consistent advantage against Black in chess, which is why chess tournaments always have the two players alternate. The advantage may not be large, but it is always present.

The reason Perception is always desirable on as many people as you can get has nothing to do with succeeding on more rolls (though that is of course useful.) It's down to two very simple things, one mathematical, one practical:

1. The more characters who can attempt to observe something, the more likely it is that you will in fact actually observe it. Of course, odds aren't too bad if every single person attempts it, but that leads to...
2. You can't guarantee every person gets a chance to observe. Sometimes, only one or two people are in place to catch something, or can see in the dark, or in some other way actually get a chance to try. The more proficient people you have, the better-protected you are against "the guy in front could've seen something, but botched his Perception roll."

 

[Minigiant]

Yeah, exactly like that. I knew it was a variant, but I haven't met anyone else who uses it.

of course.

There are barely any advice to use skills when tied to ability scores, most DMs would be lost when you separate them outside of Strength (Intimidate)

Personally I think 5e could have a Browbeat (Str), Dungeoneering (Int) Senses (Con), and Streetwise (Cha) as "duplicate" skills for Intimidate, Perception, Survival, and Stealth

Roll Perception or Senses

 

[EzekielRaiden]

of course.

There are barely any advice to use skills when tied to ability scores, most DMs would be lost when you separate them outside of Strength (Intimidate)

Personally I think 5e could have a Browbeat (Str), Dungeoneering (Int) Senses (Con), and Streetwise (Cha) as "duplicate" skills for Intimidate, Perception, Survival, and Stealth

Roll Perception or Senses

I'm very leery of any effort to outright split up skills into separate chunks. That way leads to 3rd edition "skills that are mostly useless outside of their tiny area of application, where they are godlike." Given the emphasis on making fewer but (theoretically...) meatier choices in 5e, going for a larger number of narrower skills just doesn't seem wise, and outright "duplicate" skills doesn't sound much better.

 

[tetrasodium]

I have no problem with this - seeing things and dealing with them are not equivalent. Figuring out what the magic trap will do needs Arcana, disarming the snare will need Survival.



Yep, again, because seeing a thing and acting upon that information are not equivalent.



Culture is in history or Background - yes, go ahead and use the character's Background as a skill! Since "have a skill" really just means "apply your proficiency bonus to an ability check". Engineering is tool use. Appraisal sits either in an appropriate Background, or in the tool proficiency required to make the item in question.

Because Perception can give you sensory data, but won't generally tell you what that data means. Perception doesn't interpret anything for you.

It's not that simple though. Alice could have 20/20 vision compared to bob's coke bottle legally blind strength glasses but that's not going to help her see that she's walking along an unstable cliff face if she's lived her entire life in manhattan & knows nothing of unstable cliff faces. Bob by comparison might recognize all kinds of signs that suggest the cliff face is unstable. In a lot of cases interpreting the obvious is what it takes to see a thing. Great vision & hearing won't help you beat penn & teller to the punch if you don't know anything about sleight of hand & the various tools used by the guests.

Yeah, exactly like that. I knew it was a variant, but I haven't met anyone else who uses it.

I've tried hard for years but the amount of player resistance to it is pretty extreme IME. The sheet lists attribs beside skills & players expect to do things like add dex to a wis stealth check or they fill it out prof+attrib already calculated & pause to subtract one then add the other to wis or pause to find their prof bonus then add it to the stat I called for it with. Really it wasn't until I started running levelup where no skill has a default attrib that the pushback started to recede & eventually clear instead of acting like I'm speaking eldergod for the first time almost every time a call for a nonstandard check.

 

[James Gasik]

It's not that simple though. Alice could have 20/20 vision compared to bob's coke bottle legally blind strength glasses but that's not going to help her see that she's walking along an unstable cliff face if she's lived her entire life in manhattan & knows nothing of unstable cliff faces. Bob by comparison might recognize all kinds of signs that suggest the cliff face is unstable. In a lot of cases interpreting the obvious is what it takes to see a thing. Great vision & hearing won't help you beat penn & teller to the punch if you don't know anything about sleight of hand & the various tools used by the guests.


I've tried hard for years but the amount of player resistance to it is pretty extreme IME. The sheet lists attribs beside skills & players expect to do things like add dex to a wis stealth check or they fill it out prof+attrib already calculated & pause to subtract one then add the other to wis or pause to find their prof bonus then add it to the stat I called for it with. Really it wasn't until I started running levelup where no skill has a default attrib that the pushback started to recede & eventually clear instead of acting like I'm speaking eldergod for the first time almost every time a call for a nonstandard check.

I'll have to try it and see if I can explain what's going on. But yeah, the fact that one way is the default is a factor. I played White Wolf Storyteller games for years, where this is the way things work, any Attribute can be paired with any Ability, and players would get annoyed when I'd be like "I think you should roll Wits + Alertness" when something jumps out at you suddenly, and they have high Perception.

 

[Minigiant]

I'm very leery of any effort to outright split up skills into separate chunks. That way leads to 3rd edition "skills that are mostly useless outside of their tiny area of application, where they are godlike." Given the emphasis on making fewer but (theoretically...) meatier choices in 5e, going for a larger number of narrower skills just doesn't seem wise, and outright "duplicate" skills doesn't sound much better.

Not split, duplicate.

You offer two skills to make a very common action with sometimes different results based on choice.
Roll Wisdom (Perception) or Constitution (Senses) to not be surprised.
Roll Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) to jump 5 feet more with STR fail being you fall prone and DEX fail meaning not clearing.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Not split, duplicate.

You offer two skills to make a very common action with sometimes different results based on choice.
Roll Wisdom (Perception) or Constitution (Senses) to not be surprised.
Roll Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) to jump 5 feet more with STR fail being you fall prone and DEX fail meaning not clearing.

I'm still unconvinced, but alright.

Also that sounds rather more punitive to Strength than Dexterity. Dex fail, nothing changes. Strength fail, you're now prone and in danger, and have to spend your movement standing up on your next turn (assuming you're in combat, otherwise the differences are pretty much purely fluff.)

 

[Minigiant]

I'm still unconvinced, but alright.

Also that sounds rather more punitive to Strength than Dexterity. Dex fail, nothing changes. Strength fail, you're now prone and in danger, and have to spend your movement standing up on your next turn (assuming you're in combat, otherwise the differences are pretty much purely fluff.)

Well if there was a gap or hazard, you fall in on a Dex fail as you don't get the extra 5 feet.
Str check always add the extra 5ft, you just fall prone at the end of the jump on a fail.

Strength (Browbeat) only works on people who fear violence. Charisma (Intimidation) only works on people who fear words.

Wisdom (Perception) could be hindered by background noise. Constitution (Senses) could be hindered by distractions.