D&D General What's wrong with Perception?

[Ruin Explorer]

However, given that Perception is a skill in the game, it's understandable that people are going to want to roll for it.

Sure, my issue is purely with how much it gets rolled, and when it gets rolled.

Having purely passive perception could be seen as less fun - either you automatically find it, or you automatically miss it. and since the DM setting the difficulty also knows what the passive scores are, the DM is basically deciding in advance if the party succeeds or fails.

Agree, but there are simple ways around this. First off, I would not propose never rolling, but I'd propose only rolling for things where it's sort of dramatic (ambushes, a briefly seen object, an attempt at pickpocketing), and not merely about "did you hear at the door" or "did you notice the secret door"? I will note that, inconsistently, some WotC material does use passive Perception that way, but not most of the time.

I'd also personally have made it so that basically anything physical you can notice with Perception as a passive DC you can find with intentional Investigation with a significantly lower DC. I think it's really wack that passive Investigation even exists, btw. Investigation is, by definition, an active task, and one you can definitely screw up in ways you can't really with Perception, even if you attempt to be methodical (which can itself be a mistake, or at least waste time). I've personally found very few situations where it genuinely makes sense to use passive Investigation - they're significantly rarer than active Perception checks. Passive Investigation feels like one of the various "half-baked" rules concepts that doesn't actually see much use, RAW/RAI, only if an enterprising DM decides to make use of it somehow.

Continuing I think that making it so social cues and spotting if someone is lying and the like come off Perception is a bit silly, as it's such a poor model for fiction and so irrational. You simply cannot (I would argue) be all that good at Deception, Persuasion, or Intimidation without a strong ability to read social cues, and to understand when others are doing the same. And there are plenty of people who are amazing at reading social clues who would be extremely easy to sneak up on. Right now we have a funny but stupid situation where one of the PCs (with high CHA) does all the social stuff and another acts as the lie detector (with high WIS). It's not like that's an unheard-of dynamic in fiction, but it is pretty silly-feeling, imo.

 

[Maxperson]

Even less.

That much I knew!!!

About 31% if my down-and-dirty math is correct. I'll verify after supper when I have more time.

Thanks!

 

[Bill Zebub]

Basically I hate uses of Perception in which failure means a story element is skipped, such as simply not noticing a clue, or a secret door, or hidden treasure.

I prefer it when a successful Perception roll gives you an advantage, or the inverse. Using it vs. Stealth to determine surprise is an example.

So, for example, treasure hidden in the bottom of a pool would, in my game, be automatically discovered if players dive in, or even if they just state that they examine the pool for anything. But if they ignore the pool entirely a high Perception result (or a high passive Perception) will result in catching the glint of something out of the corner of their eye.

Expressed another way, I don't use Perception to gate access to story elements, I use it to nudge players in the right direction.

 

[DND_Reborn]

That much I knew!!!

Thanks!

Double-checked, it is actually 36% chance of failing, not 31%.

"Helping" to grant advantage is better (of course), but it will take longer if you are searching multiple areas. I was working with the idea each would check something, move on to the next, and then someone checking where they just were.

Working in pairs to grant advantage would mean two groups checking instead of four "groups" of singles.

So, if you don't have a lot of options to check, working in pairs is best. If you are crunched for time and have a lot of ground to cover, you might have to work singly.

 

[delericho]

The biggest problem with Perception is the name. It should be called Senses.

Skill names shouldn't be obviously derived from verbs (perception, persuasion, intimidation, investigation, deception, performance), because that shortcuts the "what are you trying to do, how are you trying to do it" part of action declaration. "I want to perceive my surroundings" is, or should be, a perfectly valid action declaration, but it's functionally no different from "I roll Perception".

 

[teitan]

I think it's over used. I think skill checks are overused in general outside of combat. I miss take 10 and take 20 but I really miss just using description and prodding around to find the secret doors and clues. Skill checks became a bit of a crutch and especially perception. I do rely on passive perception occasionally.

 

[DND_Reborn]

The biggest problem with Perception is the name. It should be called Senses.

I'd go even further, don't make it a skill.

 

[delericho]

I'd go even further, don't make it a skill.

There's certainly an argument for that, just as with initiative.

One question, though: how then would you reflect the fact that some characters are better at it than others, and indeed that some of that can come through training?

 

[Minigiant]

I'd go even further, don't make it a skill.

There's certainly an argument for that, just as with initiative.

One question, though: how then would you reflect the fact that some characters are better at it than others, and indeed that some of that can come through training?

Agreed.
Surprise and Initiative should be rolls outside of skills.

Some classes should get Proficiency or even Expertise in Surprise, eiter surprising others or spotting a surprise.

 

[DND_Reborn]

There's certainly an argument for that, just as with initiative.

One question, though: how then would you reflect the fact that some characters are better at it than others, and indeed that some of that can come through training?

Ability scores DO represent the possibility of training already:

So, I wouldn't do anything. Just leave it at Wisdom modifier or if you can break from the sacred cow of six ability scores, make it its own thing, like I would with Initiative.