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

[iserith]

That's fair, if you like it that way.

I don't get to pick my players most of the time (I run games at my store & teach people to play). I will certainly work on teaching them how to do it "better" but in the mean-time, it's best (IMO) just to let them do what they do and move along.

I have my after-hours group, too, and they have a variety of style preferences, as well. They're my friends, I'd hate to tell one of them (I can think of one who's preferences skew the furthest) that he doesn't get to play with us because we can find someone who fits our table-style better. Ouch.

I have replaced friends in the group before with players that were a better fit. It wasn't fun, but it was the best outcome for the group. I can always hang out and do other stuff with that friend.

 

[Chaosmancer]

That is an interesting way to look at it, but I don't see how it changes the amount of information I as GM need in order to adjudicate the outcome.

How can you not adjudicate "looking" or "thinking" or "paying attention"? Those are the "actions" of those skills. I don't need the player to make a knowledge check by saying "I reach into my bag and run my fingers along the scrolls I have, trying to remember my studies" They can ask if they know something, then roll the check to discover the knowledge (discover being out of character, because in-character they always knew)

The difference is that with Persuasion, Deception, or Intimidation they aren't learning information, they are putting information into the scene. Maybe with the goal of learning something, but but they are attempting to interact with an NPC, and I agree, I need something to craft the response. An intimidation by threatening to break their legs is different than one threatening their family. I can agree with needing a direction to figure out the action. And I've got no problem with people saying that they need an action for things like stealth. Yeah, I need to know something about where you are going to go hide, so I can describe the scene. But also, many many times these actions aren't fully necessary. If the players are faced with a locked door and the barbarian holds up a die and says "athletics" I don't need them to tell me they are planning on breaking the door down. I may tell them "It will be loud" to remind them of that, but I can fully adjudicate the action from context clues and obvious conclusions.


Again, no one seems to have responded to this point, but is all of this simply because people are confusing Perception and Knowledge skills with Investigation? Because that's the only thing that makes any sense anymore but no one has answered when I bring that up.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I have replaced friends in the group before with players that were a better fit. It wasn't fun, but it was the best outcome for the group. I can always hang out and do other stuff with that friend.

As seriously as I take my gaming, I don't take it that seriously. I'd rather just allow for stylistic differences at the table. "Play Nice With Others" to me is the #1 rule of gaming, and I feel like allowing people to be included is part of that.

As is not telling you how to play. I absolutely concede that your table will flow nicely with like-minded players. Sounds great! Just not how I'd do it. (I'd probably fit in, though!)

 

[Charlaquin]

we have a house rule that all of us follow about retries, so in a new game with a NEW DM i would be fine with it (TBH i don't even remember if there is and if so what it is about RAW retries)

Ok, so why is the roll of the die special? In both cases, I have applied the rules for perception to determine what your character sees when they look around, you have failed to notice something hidden in the room, and you are unable to just “try again.” Why does rolling a die instead of applying a passive score make it ok?

 

[tetrasodium]

So, you demand I take an action. I take an action, and you tell me it has been done (passively, no roll) and that I am wasting everyone's time.

Yet, clearly, I have an action and intent that I have described, so why do I not get a chance to use that action? Can anyone ever actively look in your game, or is passive perception the only thing that matters?

Yes I do when I am the GM. The GM at a given table has both the authority as well as the rules support to require a hypothetical player at their table to take an action that in most cases engages their character in some way. A hypothetical player has neither the authority nor rules support to demand their GM accept a refusal to do so as successfully engaging their character. If a hypothetical player is not ok with the authority granted them by the GM & rules themselves that player has the authority to find some other game & from your prior posts it sounds like you've done that at least once.

As to the shy players who might not feel comfortable speaking up....

Spoiler: this video about roleplaying & social anxiety might help

 

[Charlaquin]

better is so weird...

I don't think anyone that plays my way plays better then yours (although tbf my way allows for both at same table) but you seem to think that YOUR way is the better one...

No one has actually said their way is better.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

How can you not adjudicate "looking" or "thinking" or "paying attention"? Those are the "actions" of those skills. I don't need the player to make a knowledge check by saying "I reach into my bag and run my fingers along the scrolls I have, trying to remember my studies"

someone (I don't remember who) in an earlier version of this thread literally said something akin to you have to declare an action and as such if you want to remember an arcane symbol you would say something akin to "my character searches him memory to see if he has ever seen this symbol or one like it?" but could not name the arcane skill or the int stat

 

[billd91]

Ok, so why is the roll of the die special? In both cases, I have applied the rules for perception to determine what your character sees when they look around, you have failed to notice something hidden in the room, and you are unable to just “try again.” Why does rolling a die instead of applying a passive score make it ok?

The passive score is useful as a metagame tool for game pacing. But it also cuts off half the potential results - the higher half. So for an individual case, it’s not very convincing, in fact it’s completely unconvincing, that the PC had a chance to reach their highest possible result. At least getting the roll validates that you’ve given the PC that potential even if the roll ends up worse than the passive score.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Ok, so why is the roll of the die special?

I'm not sure I follow. You have a passive walking around taking your time score (for perception all the time but sometimes for investigate and insight and I have heard of DMs that go all the way with a bunch of other skills too) and you have your active "I am looking around" roll the d20+ mod.

they are different things. "what my passive sees" and "make a ____ check" don't mean the same to me.

In both cases, I have applied the rules for perception to determine what your character sees when they look around, you have failed to notice something hidden in the room, and you are unable to just “try again.” Why does rolling a die instead of applying a passive score make it ok?

like i said before I walk in you describe what a passive XX sees, if I take a small amount of time and say I look around I get a roll with a bonus of XX-10

 

[Charlaquin]

someone (I don't remember who) in an earlier version of this thread literally said something akin to you have to declare an action and as such if you want to remember an arcane symbol you would say something akin to "my character searches him memory to see if he has ever seen this symbol or one like it?" but could not name the arcane skill or the int stat

That may have been me or @iserith, as that is how we both handle “recall lore” type actions. Though to clarify, I ask that players say what they hope to learn and where they may have learned it. So, your example satisfies the first (they want to learn if they have seen the symbol or anything like it before), but not where they would have learned it. So I would request the player suggest something from the character’s background where they might have come across such information. And it’s fine if it’s made up on the spot.