D&D General What's wrong with Perception?

[tetrasodium]

IMO, its mostly terrible adventure design...

Why are the DC's for doors so high? Assuming that a character has +2 Prof, and +2 or 3 for their Wis, they have to roll a 15 or so to see the door? Is it intentionally so well hidden as to need that level of Perception? If not, bad design. If so, why?

And are there other ways to access the areas hidden behind the doors that are less onerous? Why not?

Is accessing those doors critical to the adventure's success? If so. Bad design.

And frankly, half of those rolls are stupid. I have to roll a DC 15 to find a jade figurine in a firepit? Or to notice missing mortar? So I have a 50% chance of missing those? Bad design. They could both be auto successes if someone pokes through the firepit, or look around where the mortar is.

With adventures like this, no wonder people in the other Perception thread said "I roll Perception". It seems that at least this adventure is modeled on Perception checks everywhere, and a lot of times where they aren't needed.

YMMV

Most likely because it's a reprint of an old adventure where DCs would scale by level. Some of the dungeons in it probably have as much if not more treasure than at least one full (likely more than 1) 5e HC adventure too. 5E has design elements that make certain styles of play somewhere between difficult to problematic & the inability for wotc to convert those old modules over without losing a lot in the adaptation if they changed them to fit 5e norms highlights that.

DC15 is pretty low for a check with proficient skills not tied to your dump stat though.

 

[James Gasik]

I wasn't trying to be hyberbolic, and like I said, this IS my experience at my table.

What is the upside? How do you play the game then? If traps, secret doors, ambushes and surprise are so horrible that they should ALWAYS be avoided, then why have them? What is the fun in their inclusion? I ask these questions mostly rhetorically by the way.

The game has systems built into it to handle these types of situations. People apply those systems differently at different tables. Different tables have different levels of tolerance of variablility, chance, and danger. Clearly there is a middle ground. But even bounded accuracy doesn't provide a middle ground. If the player(s) wants to maximize their Perception, and see and use it as an "avoid all, see all stat", then that is their prerogative as a player, and the DM either supports that or doesn't.

But it does appear that what the "modern" gamer is looking for in their game of dungeons and dragons has significantly shifted, as far as I have been able to tell. One could also argue that traps, ambushes, secret doors, and surprise interfere with player agency, and should be removed from the game, or be relegated to optional deep in the DMG. I mean, its just no fun to be caught by a trap. Or to not be able to react to an ambush. Or to miss a secret door...

My players feel this way. If you do anything that they absolutely 100% can't see coming, or avoid, then, why, that's dirty pool old man! "How come I didn't see the trap?" "Well, you failed the roll." "But I would have looked again!"...

See this is the problem. All these things are binary. Either you notice the traps/hidden doors/concealed enemies or you...don't. There's not much middle ground. If you're careful about the DC's, to the point that players don't need to invest, then all it takes is one guy who does and they see all the things.

If you're like WotC (see my previous post on Sunless Citadel), many DC's are so high that you need investment or you'll miss a great deal.

It's not fun to blunder into a scythe trap for d8 damage, or miss a crucial secret door, or be poisoned by a quasit.

But it's also not fun if the only way to surprise players with these things is to set the DC's to ridiculous levels.

The problem is, the game isn't built with any middle ground. A priest of the sea god with 16 Wisdom and the Sailor Background has a +5 Perception. That's enough to not be surprised by a quasit (picking on this creature because I just looked up it's Stealth +5). That's not enough to avoid being surprised by a Bugbear (Stealth +6).

A DC 20 secret door? Yeah, only a 1 in 4 to spot it.

Then along comes a Rogue with expertise in Perception, and it's not long before he trivializes all these checks, and if you use higher DC's to challenge them, the rest of the party suffers.

So what's the right answer? Invest wisely in Perception to not have these problems, or...don't?

 

[overgeeked]

So what's the right answer?

Accept that it’s a game, you don’t have to 100% complete it, and you’ll miss some stuff.

 

[James Gasik]

Why are players reading the module? They shouldn’t be. And yes, so? Sometimes you miss stuff. So what? Unless it’s necessary to continue playing it’s optional content.

DC10 is a 55% chance of success without any bonuses.

DC15 is a 30% chance of success without any bonuses.

DC20 is a 5% chance of success without any bonuses.

Sometimes things are hard. Sometimes the PCs fail. It’s a game with dice. Sometimes you roll low.

Who said anything about them reading the module? I'm just saying, if this is an official product, and someone goes on this adventure, and they fail a lot of Perception rolls, they're going to realize "hey, not having Perception is bad".

 

[Vaalingrade]

That’s a bit more hyperbolic than normal for around here, eh? Your options are not “perfect” or “suck.” There’s a wide range in between. That’s what the d20, ability score, and DC are for. Proficiency only adds +10-30%. It doesn’t make you always miss everything forever and ever.

Proficiency is the only handle you actually have a say over, seeing as how your stats are actually controlled by your class. You're not going to pump your wisdom to only slightly suck at Perception instead of totally sucking when you can do the only real thing that matters and suck a bit more than is reasonable unless your a Bard or Rogue and have 'Be Reasonable at Skills' as a class feature.

 

[overgeeked]

Who said anything about them reading the module? I'm just saying, if this is an official product, and someone goes on this adventure, and they fail a lot of Perception rolls, they're going to realize "hey, not having Perception is bad".

You did.

“Let me share some examples of why players might think they need to be good at Perception.”

Players won’t have that impression unless they read the module. If they play without reading the modules, they’ll just miss some stuff and not know what the DCs are. They won’t be able to tell the difference between nothing there and really high DC. Unless the referee tells them, which is a terrible idea.

This is also why referees should be rolling secret door etc checks behind the screen. The player shouldn’t know they missed something because it will inevitably be a metagame problem.

 

[James Gasik]

You did.

“Let me share some examples of why players might think they need to be good at Perception.”

Players won’t have that impression unless they read the module. If they play without reading the modules, they’ll just miss some stuff and not know what the DCs are. They won’t be able to tell the difference between nothing there and really high DC. Unless the referee tells them, which is a terrible idea.

This is also why referees should be rolling secret door etc checks behind the screen. The player shouldn’t know they misses something because it will inevitably be a metagame problem.

Again, I never said anything about players reading the adventure. How did they know? Because they asked me after the adventure was concluded, and I told them.

I don't believe in hiding game mechanics from the players, otherwise, they can never learn about the game. If they ask, I'll explain at the end of every adventure I run.

 

[Maxperson]

The first problem with Acrobatics is its name. Players naturally take it in order to be able to do the things that acrobats can do - but, in practice, most of the things that acrobats can do are governed in-game by Athletics.

Not in 5e. Athletics is more basic. Running fast, marathon running, climbing, jumping farther than normal, etc. Acrobatics is explicitly what acrobats do.

"Your Dexterity (Acrobatics) check covers your attempt to stay on your feet in a tricky situation, such as when you're trying to run across a sheet of ice, balance on a tightrope, or stay upright on a rocking ship's deck. The DM might also call for a Dexterity (Acrobatics) check to see if you can perform acrobatic stunts, including dives, rolls, somersaults, and flips."

They seem to want acrobatics to primarily be balance, since that comes up more than flips would, but flips would still be acrobatics and not athletics.

Between those two factors, it tends to wind up being a very narrowly-applicable skill that is hardly ever called for.

It isn't used much, but I think it would be very effective if it were. Someone who knew when to dive, roll, etc. in combat would be a force. For instance, if two enemies were blocking a passage and you normally could not pass through them, I would give a DC and allow an acrobat to do a dive roll in-between them and get to the other side.

 

[Micah Sweet]

See this is the problem. All these things are binary. Either you notice the traps/hidden doors/concealed enemies or you...don't. There's not much middle ground. If you're careful about the DC's, to the point that players don't need to invest, then all it takes is one guy who does and they see all the things.

If you're like WotC (see my previous post on Sunless Citadel), many DC's are so high that you need investment or you'll miss a great deal.

It's not fun to blunder into a scythe trap for d8 damage, or miss a crucial secret door, or be poisoned by a quasit.

But it's also not fun if the only way to surprise players with these things is to set the DC's to ridiculous levels.

The problem is, the game isn't built with any middle ground. A priest of the sea god with 16 Wisdom and the Sailor Background has a +5 Perception. That's enough to not be surprised by a quasit (picking on this creature because I just looked up it's Stealth +5). That's not enough to avoid being surprised by a Bugbear (Stealth +6).

A DC 20 secret door? Yeah, only a 1 in 4 to spot it.

Then along comes a Rogue with expertise in Perception, and it's not long before he trivializes all these checks, and if you use higher DC's to challenge them, the rest of the party suffers.

So what's the right answer? Invest wisely in Perception to not have these problems, or...don't?

Having a middle ground requires more work. As in many, many other areas, WotC isn't going to do that work, because the new players that are all they care about don't care about that.

Look at Level Up. They did the work, and there's an active Kickstarter right now selling it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Again, I never said anything about players reading the adventure. How did they know? Because they asked me after the adventure was concluded, and I told them.

I don't believe in hiding game mechanics from the players, otherwise, they can never learn about the game. If they ask, I'll explain at the end of every adventure I run.

Then in a sense, your personal preferences have created this problem.