Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 7798822" data-attributes="member: 32740">I'd only say that when the player/PC says they are suspicious about the tea and that's why they're smelling it then the perception check is appropriate, but the results are irrelevant because there is nothing to perceive.&nbsp; After all, if the check is failed has the PC failed to perceive that tea is tea?&nbsp; I would reply enthusiastically that the player perceives nothing of significance, being firm without saying so outright, that the die roll means nothing.&nbsp; Nothing is there to perceive - or a rare possibility that perception wouldn't find anything even if there were something afoot.&nbsp; By stating suspicion the player earns the right to more information that either confirms or subverts their suspicion.&nbsp; The perception check gives them that information.&nbsp; The request for a medicine check however is redundant and I would simply respond, &quot;You don't need one.&nbsp; It's just tea.&quot;&nbsp; Again, that would be regardless of the Perception check.&nbsp; Only if there WERE something to detect (good or bad) and the perception check was a failure, would any kind of additional roll be warranted.For the same reason that I would be reluctant to have a PC keep making checks of some kind until they finally fail and I could then more easily inflict something nefarious upon them, I'm not going to let players keep making checks of some kind until they succeed and they can AVOID something nefarious happening to their PC.&nbsp; If the player wants to try to detect poison then it is up to the player to decide how best to do that.Let's assume for a moment that there is poison in the tea.&nbsp; Assuming also that the poison could be detected by either a medicine or perception check the player can choose which check works best for them.&nbsp; If they have more bonuses to apply to a medicine check then they can use that.&nbsp; If they don't know which would be better from a mechanical standpoint they can ask.&nbsp; How the game mechanics work (or how I choose to have them work) is not information I have a right to keep secret from them.&nbsp; But one check of one kind would be all they'd get and that's pass/fail.&nbsp; That's also how the mechanics work.&nbsp; They can't just keep trying to find ways to argue that other checks could also be used to detect the poison and that they get to try them all until they succeed or run out of other checks to weasel into, I don't care how paranoid they or their PC's are.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Man in the Funny Hat, post: 7798822, member: 32740"] I'd only say that when the player/PC says they are suspicious about the tea and that's why they're smelling it then the perception check is appropriate, but the results are irrelevant because there is nothing to perceive. After all, if the check is failed has the PC failed to perceive that tea is tea? I would reply enthusiastically that the player perceives nothing of significance, being firm without saying so outright, that the die roll means nothing. Nothing is there to perceive - or a rare possibility that perception wouldn't find anything even if there were something afoot. By stating suspicion the player earns the right to more information that either confirms or subverts their suspicion. The perception check gives them that information. The request for a medicine check however is [I]redundant[/I] and I would simply respond, "You don't need one. It's just tea." Again, that would be regardless of the Perception check. Only if there WERE something to detect (good or bad) and the perception check was a failure, would any kind of additional roll be warranted. For the same reason that I would be reluctant to have a PC keep making checks of some kind until they finally fail and I could then more easily inflict something nefarious upon them, I'm not going to let players keep making checks of some kind until they succeed and they can AVOID something nefarious happening to their PC. If the player wants to try to detect poison then it is up to the player to decide how best to do that. Let's assume for a moment that there is poison in the tea. Assuming also that the poison [I]could[/I] be detected by either a medicine or perception check the player can choose which check works best for them. If they have more bonuses to apply to a medicine check then they can use that. If they don't know which would be better from a mechanical standpoint they can ask. How the game mechanics work (or how [I]I[/I] choose to have them work) is not information I have a right to keep secret from them. But one check of one kind would be all they'd get and that's pass/fail. That's also how the mechanics work. They can't just keep trying to find ways to argue that other checks could also be used to detect the poison and that they get to try them all until they succeed or run out of other checks to weasel into, I don't care how paranoid they or their PC's are. [/QUOTE]

Verification