D&D General "I make a perception check."

[Umbran]

“Passive” checks in 5e are used to represent the character performing an action repeatedly over time.

With the note that it is assumed that PCs are effectively a little paranoid, and so are almost always looking around (Perception) thinking about what they see (Investigation) and gauging people they talk to (Insight), even if the player doesn't specifically note it.

 

[Charlaquin]

With the note that it is assumed that PCs are effectively a little paranoid, and so are almost always looking around (Perception) thinking about what they see (Investigation) and gauging people they talk to (Insight), even if the player doesn't specifically note it.

Right, which makes “I look around” kind of a superfluous action declaration. Like, yes, I know you’re looking around, that’s why I described what you saw in the environment. Is there anything else you would like to do?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

“Passive” checks in 5e are used to represent the character performing an action repeatedly over time. In other words, your character was already looking around, and didn’t notice the assassin; that’s what the passive perception check was for. To find her, you would need to try something else, possibly something more specific than looking around.

i disagree passive is passive. I walk into the room and don't say i am looking around, I just walk to teh bed.
active is active not passive, I walked in and LOOKED around, that is an action an activation now there is a roll (or not depending on DM call) if the DM says there is not, but I had 35% chance of seeing her I would ask WHY I didn't get the chance, and if the answer was word games "I'm sorry you didn't declair your intent to look around in enough detail" I will NOT be happy

 

[delericho]

Yeah, I'm afraid I'm not too bothered by "I make a Perception check." Yes, it's technically wrong, but IMO it's not so wrong as to be worth bothering with.

I'm much more bothered by "I check for traps" - they're too many and too varied for that to be a thing. So for that you'll need to tell me if you're looking, if you're touching, and maybe some other details.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I think we are misunderstanding one another. Let me try and clarify my end:

You walk into a room in which there is a hidden assassin. I check my notes, and see that your passive perception does not beat the assassin's stealth check. I describe the room to you, including some dark corners and other places to hide. You say "I make a perception check." I stop you and say, "What do you do?" You say, "I look around." I say, "You see the room (repeat description)." You say," I want to peer into the darkness; I don't trust those shadows." THAT is when I say, "Make a perception check," because you actively did a thing that changes the state from when you walked in.

those worrd games where I need to spell out what I mean (unless you truely could not in context figure out my intent) would annoy me. Over time it would make me quite your game.

As a side note and equally important, the assassin watches you actively peering into the shadows. This is a thing that will likely cause a response from the assassin. That's why you need to state what you are doing.

looking around IS still doing something active... what if she was hiding under the bed instead of in the shadows? what if when you asked for more info I said I looked at the shadows that would not trigger finding her under the bed right? or if she IS in the shadows but I said "I don;t know I look um, behind the chair, under the bed, all teh places something might be?"

If you said, "I don't trust those shadows. I am going to discretely make my way over the fire and poke the logs hoping to illuminate the room a little more." That is a different set of actions with a different potential outcome. That is why I need to know what your character is actually physically doing in the world.

but looking around IS an action you can take in the world. It is ACTIVLEY trying to PERCIVE things

 

[Charlaquin]

i disagree passive is passive.

Well the rules for passive checks literally say they represent the results of an action performed repeatedly over time. You may of course rule otherwise if you wish, but that’s how it works according to the books.

I walk into the room and don't say i am looking around, I just walk to teh bed.
active is active not passive, I walked in and LOOKED around, that is an action an activation now there is a roll (or not depending on DM call) if the DM says there is not, but I had 35% chance of seeing her I would ask WHY I didn't get the chance, and if the answer was word games "I'm sorry you didn't declair your intent to look around in enough detail" I will NOT be happy

It’s not a matter of not having described your intent to look around in enough detail. I would already have narrated what you saw from looking around based on what is plain to see and what your passive perception indicates you would notice just by looking around. No amount of detail is going to change the fact that I have already described everything you noticed by looking around. If you want to find out if there’s something hidden that you didn’t notice by looking around, you need to try something else.

 

[Shardstone]

Its just very tiring to have to reword "I want to make a Perception check" a thousand times in a campaign.

People want to do a Perception check because they are trained that Perception is what unlocks goodies, dangers, or new information. If you don't want them to say it all the time, you need to just giving out better information, or you need to tell them you rely on passive Perception and instead only use Perception checks when called for by you.

 

[Reynard]

those worrd games where I need to spell out what I mean (unless you truely could not in context figure out my intent) would annoy me. Over time it would make me quite your game.

looking around IS still doing something active... what if she was hiding under the bed instead of in the shadows? what if when you asked for more info I said I looked at the shadows that would not trigger finding her under the bed right? or if she IS in the shadows but I said "I don;t know I look um, behind the chair, under the bed, all teh places something might be?"

but looking around IS an action you can take in the world. It is ACTIVLEY trying to PERCIVE things

All that is why we have a conversation in play and why clarifying your intent and the actions of your character matter. If you need more information, you ask. If I need more information, i ask. We eventually get to a place where a die roll is made (or not).

Your entire concern seems to revolve around the "gotcha DM" style of play. That's not what I do or how I run my games, so arguing with me about how you you shouldn't have had to state your hypothetical character was looking under the bed is a moot point. Yes, some GMs would feel empowered by tricking you into looking in the wrong place and then killing your PC. You shouldn't play with those people.

 

[Umbran]

Right, which makes “I look around” kind of a superfluous action declaration.

Except, it isn't. Because the player likely hasn't internalized your personal take on the lingo. Declaring "I look around" is a statement that the character is taking somewhat more care and attention on it.

Passive Perception, Investigation, or Insight) don't take an action, but Search using any of these does.

 

[Cadence]

Well the rules for passive checks literally say they represent the results of an action performed repeatedly over time. You may of course rule otherwise if you wish, but that’s how it works according to the books.

So, "No, I pause and really look instead of just our usual caution" would work?

(That's what I would have taken the extra "I look" to be if it was said in an situation where it was assumed they already did a general look as part of the usual set-up.)