D&D 5E How do you run Perception and the Gelatinous Cube?

[rgoodbb]

As the title says, I'm not sure exactly how to approach this encounter. I don't need help on where to place it and what sorts of traps to use it on etc., just the initial do you spot it.

• Do you ask for perception checks and alert the PC’s that there is something to spot?
• Do you rely on Passive Perceptions and anyone high enough just spots it?
• Or do you rule that if no-one is actively searching then they can just walk right into it if they move into its space?

(I just made one from DM Scotty’s YouTube site with a glue gun and some plastic. It was so easy and it looks great so I’m eager to use it at some point fairly soon)

Thanks for your time and responses.

 

[MerricB]

The default is to rely on Passive Perception. It's why it exists.

Active Perception checks typically occur when something the players know is around has hidden from them, and they need to find it again.

Cheers!

 

[Shadowdweller00]

As the title says, I'm not sure exactly how to approach this encounter. I don't need help on where to place it and what sorts of traps to use it on etc., just the initial do you spot it.

• Do you ask for perception checks and alert the PC’s that there is something to spot?
• Do you rely on Passive Perceptions and anyone high enough just spots it?
• Or do you rule that if no-one is actively searching then they can just walk right into it if they move into its space?

I use passive perception unless a PC announces that they are actively searching a particular area. In general, if a PC announces that they are scrutinizing a particular place (effectively using actions to concentrate on that area) they or I as DM get to roll a perception check. That way merely calling for the check doesn't give anything away; though I tend to provide plenty of environmental details from perception as well, as opposed to traps or hiding monsters.

 

[MostlyDm]

I use passive perception unless a PC announces that they are actively searching a particular area. In general, if a PC announces that they are scrutinizing a particular place (effectively using actions to concentrate on that area) they or I as DM get to roll a perception check. That way merely calling for the check doesn't give anything away; though I tend to provide plenty of "red herrings" as well, relating to general environmental details.

This doesn't have much to do with what you said per se, but it got me thinking...

It kinda bugs me that active scrutiny results in worse results than general alertness about 50% of the time.

I wonder if I should change passive perception to be 8+perception, kind of like spell DCs. Then active scrutiny is directly more statistically worthwhile.

 

[Shadowdweller00]

This doesn't have much to do with what you said per se, but it got me thinking...

It kinda bugs me that active scrutiny results in worse results than general alertness about 50% of the time.

I wonder if I should change passive perception to be 8+perception, kind of like spell DCs. Then active scrutiny is directly more statistically worthwhile.

The way I run things, active scrutiny usually only matters when passive scrutiny (passive perception) fails. That is to say I provide base information and stealth/surprise based on passive perception, but actively scrutinizing something might yield more details. So it's more like a 50% chance to improve your perception ability.

 

[MostlyDm]

The way I run things, active scrutiny usually only matters when passive scrutiny (passive perception) fails. That is to say I provide base information and stealth/surprise based on passive perception, but actively scrutinizing something might yield more details. So it's more like a 50% chance to improve your perception ability.

Makes sense.

I sometimes lament high passive perception scores, which probably contributes to finding merit in the idea of a lower base number.

Edit: I don't actually lament them that much in actual play. In fact, the only game I'm in where it's truly egregious is a game where I am not the DM, and I am in fact the jerk who jacked his passive perception through the roof. But it's something I am... wary of, due to my experience with a character like that.

 

[Shadowdweller00]

I sometimes lament high passive perception scores, which probably contributes to finding merit in the idea of a lower base number.

Yeah, one of the things that bugs me about 5e (and related systems) is that Perception is kind of the God Skill. I don't have a good fix for it unfortunately.

 

[Plaguescarred]

As the title says, I'm not sure exactly how to approach this encounter. I don't need help on where to place it and what sorts of traps to use it on etc., just the initial do you spot it.

It's a DC 15 Wisdom (Perception) check to spot a cube that has neither moved nor attacked. For things that players must remain unaware of if they fail to notice them, i find it best to rely on passive checks to see if they notice them, be it trap, hidden passage and Transparent creatures etc so that failure doesn't alert them of their PC failure - especially if all of them fails it.


Transparent: Even when the cube is in plain sight, it takes a successful DC 15 Wisdom (Perception) check to spot a cube that has neither moved nor attacked. A creature that tries to enter the cube's space while unaware of the cube is surprised by the cube.

 

[Eubani]

Due to its transparency if I was wanting an ambush or a chance of I would set a challenging DC of say 15-16 if it was moving or 16-18 if it was in waiting in ambush. If I wished it to be just another encounter or wanted the players to notice it I would have objects floating in it thus reducing the DC to 10.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

You may not spot the Cube, but instead notice signs of it's occupation - area is remarkably clean, slight acid-washing of a piece of metal on the ground, etc. Maybe toss that out to players with a good enough PP and let them work it out from there. That will usually be enough.