Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Beast master wants to use pet to get +5 to passive perception
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 8543127" data-attributes="member: 97077"><p>Players can't actually bend rules though or even abuse them. The only one who has control over the rules is the DM who is tasked with arbitrating between the rules and the players. The player in this thread is asking if the wolf can work together with the PC for a bonus to passive Perception, not abusing the rules.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Your interpretation of the rules appears to be, like many DMs, too generous which makes passive Perception overvalued. It's <em>not </em>always-on radar except in combat or setting up for combat (i.e. determining surprise). Players <em>do </em>have to declare their actions, whether they are one-offs or repeated actions. And some of those actions can be <em>mutually exclusive</em> with other actions. To do otherwise incentivizes maximizing Perception beyond what the game likely intends. To then suggest it's somehow wrong to maximize Perception in that context is a little weird in my opinion. The DM in this case sets the stage for it happen and then judges the player when they do what they are incentivized to do. Why <em>wouldn't </em>I want to detect creatures, traps, and secret doors much of the time with very little opportunity cost and no risk? That's a great deal if the DM is running the game that way!</p><p></p><p></p><p>We're talking about traps and secret doors, right? Those are both things to be poked and prodded to figure out how they work and, in the case of traps, disarm (or at least bypass in some fashion). I'm not sure what you mean as to uncertainty about how interesting it is. Why would you include content in your game that <em>isn't </em>interesting?</p><p></p><p>Further, I don't see why this invalidates other characters' abilities to interface with the environment. Everyone is free to declare whatever actions they want while traveling the adventure location. There's no need for the DM to make any special preparation for highly perceptive characters either. I certainly don't. If you're keeping watch and in the front rank, you might avoid surprise and see the traps - great!</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>For the first bullet, I don't think you've established how this is invalidating parts of the game for others.</p><p></p><p>For the second bullet, it seems to me you are ignoring certain rules for reasons that are unclear when it comes to how you handle Perception, thus creating a situation where it is more useful than intended. To correct for this, you then have a social agreement that nobody should then avail themselves of the opportunity by investing in Perception accordingly unless they have some kind of good in-character reason for it (which is easy to just make up in my view). It seems easier to me to just run Perception as it says to and everything else will fall into place. [USER=6812658]@Seramus[/USER] has helpfully posted a number of the related rules to take into account.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="iserith, post: 8543127, member: 97077"] Players can't actually bend rules though or even abuse them. The only one who has control over the rules is the DM who is tasked with arbitrating between the rules and the players. The player in this thread is asking if the wolf can work together with the PC for a bonus to passive Perception, not abusing the rules. Your interpretation of the rules appears to be, like many DMs, too generous which makes passive Perception overvalued. It's [I]not [/I]always-on radar except in combat or setting up for combat (i.e. determining surprise). Players [I]do [/I]have to declare their actions, whether they are one-offs or repeated actions. And some of those actions can be [I]mutually exclusive[/I] with other actions. To do otherwise incentivizes maximizing Perception beyond what the game likely intends. To then suggest it's somehow wrong to maximize Perception in that context is a little weird in my opinion. The DM in this case sets the stage for it happen and then judges the player when they do what they are incentivized to do. Why [I]wouldn't [/I]I want to detect creatures, traps, and secret doors much of the time with very little opportunity cost and no risk? That's a great deal if the DM is running the game that way! We're talking about traps and secret doors, right? Those are both things to be poked and prodded to figure out how they work and, in the case of traps, disarm (or at least bypass in some fashion). I'm not sure what you mean as to uncertainty about how interesting it is. Why would you include content in your game that [I]isn't [/I]interesting? Further, I don't see why this invalidates other characters' abilities to interface with the environment. Everyone is free to declare whatever actions they want while traveling the adventure location. There's no need for the DM to make any special preparation for highly perceptive characters either. I certainly don't. If you're keeping watch and in the front rank, you might avoid surprise and see the traps - great! For the first bullet, I don't think you've established how this is invalidating parts of the game for others. For the second bullet, it seems to me you are ignoring certain rules for reasons that are unclear when it comes to how you handle Perception, thus creating a situation where it is more useful than intended. To correct for this, you then have a social agreement that nobody should then avail themselves of the opportunity by investing in Perception accordingly unless they have some kind of good in-character reason for it (which is easy to just make up in my view). It seems easier to me to just run Perception as it says to and everything else will fall into place. [USER=6812658]@Seramus[/USER] has helpfully posted a number of the related rules to take into account. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Beast master wants to use pet to get +5 to passive perception
Top