Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 5114242" data-attributes="member: 2011">Uh huh.If DMs do not envision the system the way you do, then they do not understand the best way to use the system.This is just wrong on so many levels.The problems with 4E Perception are the same problems that have existed for a long time in DND with regard to Spot.1) The DM creates something hidden. The Passive Perception game mechanic is basically worthless because if it is below that number, the PCs always find it. Why bother? Just tell the PCs that something is there.2) The concept of foreshadowing is just another way of saying: Roll your Perception. It might be a slightly cooler way, but it boils down to the same thing.3) The chance to find something hidden is dependent on the DC of it combined with the number of players rolling and their Perception bonuses. If the DM wants the party to have an ~50% chance to find something, that can be blown out of the water if fewer or more PCs actively attempt Perception than the DM expected. In the case of fewer PCs (or none), then it becomes a case of the DM either letting it slide, or throwing out clues, or fudging or whatever. I prefer just letting it slide. If I wanted the PCs to auto-find something, I would just allow them to find it.So my preferred system is to only use Passive Perception in "within range" situations. In other words, if the PCs with the high Passive Perception get within range (e.g. 6 squares in a given situation or whatever), they auto-spot something. If they don't get within range, they don't. If within range is a long distance, I don't even bother with Passive Perception DCs. I just tell the PCs what the observant PC(s) notice. Passive Perception is a rule and game layer that really isn't needed.I use Active Perception for everything else. It is either obvious to some or all of the PCs, or you have to roll and you have to tell me you want to roll.So in the case of a hidden door or a hidden trap, they are typically hidden for a reason. It will almost always be an Active Perception required to spot them.In the case of a hidden trap that is not intentionally made to be a trap (like a dead fall outdoors due to a natural sinkhole or something), then it often becomes a Passive Perception (or Active Perception if the player wants to) based on "within range". The DC is typically not high for these situations, so they fall under the Passive Perception result of the most observant PCs. But, that does not mean that they auto-spot it. They only auto-spot it if they get close enough. If a different unobservant PC walks into the area and the observant PCs are not close enough to see it and nobody either tries to make an Active Perception or fail their rolls, then the unobservant PC walks into the trap.Another way of handling this is to make the Perception DC a set number and then increase it by 2 for every square away from the hidden object. That way, the DM knows ahead of time exactly how close each PC has to get in order to make a Passive Perception automatically.So in response to the OP, I never tell my players to roll Perception and I rarely have hidden traps or other things which a Passive Perception will make unless I also want an Active Perception from the less observant PCs to have a fair chance of finding it.Hidden things should be hidden. They should rarely be auto-found. The DC for hidden things should often be higher (and somethings a lot higher) than the best Passive Perceptions in the party. If they are not higher, then they should be ranged based Perceptions.Otherwise, why bother? Just tell the group that they spot the trap if it is easy to spot.</blockquote>

Verification