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

[GMforPowergamers]

Wait. Seriously. A door set into a wall that is plain as day if you move the bookcase can be missed?

you iddn't say plain as day until AFTER me saying I would call for a roll

I strongly disagree with that. If you move the bookcase, you WILL see that door just sitting there in the wall. No roll is necessary.

only because it is the least hidden thing I have run into in years...

As for you not being used to such things, I have been encountering them since 1e.

well I didn't play 1e... in 2e I did (I think) run and play with things that easy to find... but again not used to it in modern games.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Concealed doors behind tapestries are practically a trope in D&D, IME. I'm not sure that's something that you can disagree with. Something maybe you don't see or remember in your games, sure.

again I can see a 'door behind the tapesty' just not having to search to find it... like having to take time stating what you are looking behind and under

 

[Mannahnin]

bull... no where did anyone say "IT is clear for anyone to see" it was a secret door so I assumed had a DC to find...

no, if it is clear to everyone to see no that is no roll. I just am not used to things being so easy to find if they are hidden

edit: and if it was that easy to find just have to move 1 object I would most likely have just used everyones passive to see who sees the needed moving of said book case, there would be no need (unless everyone dumped perception) to even roleplay that

The difference between Secret Doors and Concealed Doors may be less codified in the D&D rules today than when I was a kid (I can still remember the different mapping symbols for them) EDIT: apparently not. Max has quoted the 5E DMG now. A secret door is built to not be seen, and generally has some hidden way of opening it, which you have to search for. A concealed door typically has some sort of physical obstruction blocking people from seeing it, like being hidden behind a book case, or a curtain.

Max used a specific word for a specific reason, and you substituted a different word.

What I will say and have said is what the DMG says: "Roleplaying can diminish if players feel that their die rolls, rather than their decisions and characterizations, always determine success." If my decisions have little to no impact on the DC or whether I have advantage or disadvantage, then yeah, I'm going to just ask to make ability checks because that's all that really matters. That game is definitely not for me.

I don't understand why the role play needs to give you an advantage... is not the benefit the 'having fun' part?

For the same reason that (e.g.) focusing fire gives you an advantage in combat?

This is a game. Part of playing it is making decisions and adopting strategies which improve your odds of success. Whether that's taking out the enemy healer first, or researching what kind of food and wine the foreign envoy likes best, so you can make him really happy at the welcome feast before asking his help, or checking behind the curtains and under the rugs when you're searching a room to find a hidden door or compartment.

That kind of decisionmaking is much more compelling, engaging, and fun for me than the part of the game where I take a feat to increase my character's skill bonus so I roll higher on a check.

 

[Maxperson]

you iddn't say plain as day until AFTER me saying I would call for a roll

That was crystal clear from concealed door and the concealed door rules. If you reveal it, it's clear as day. I explicitly brought up plain as day after you said you would call for a roll, because I couldn't understand why you would call for a roll to see a concealed door after it had been revealed.

only because it is the least hidden thing I have run into in years...

Many NPCs are just normal folks, not super BBEG bond villains who have the resources and know how to expertly craft secret doors. Sometimes they just push a dresser with a mirror on top in front of the door. I design my maps with the creators in mind. The old miser on top of the hill isn't going to pay for a secret door, he's just going to try and conceal it somehow.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I tell them that I will let them auto-succeed on some things based on their skills, abilities, and situation, so asking to make a check is asking to have a chance of failure where they wouldn't necessarily. (I will still give them auto-success if they mention a check and it occurs to me they don't need one, but it may not occur to me, so best practice is not to mention it.)

Seems to have mostly done the trick.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Right. Because when you describe your processes of play, those processes of play require filling in blanks where the players don't provide them.

no but it does require someone to read into and add that to the description... skipping the details is not adding details

Like what Celebrim was talking about with the Transcript of Play concept.

again fading to commercial break and coming back to the next scene is not adding anything (not that I or anyone I know for that matter) makes any such transcript... and I think Celebrim said he doesn't either so I am lost as to the value of a thing none of us write.

The way you have described running your game indicates that at least some of the time (more than me in my game, say) you are the guy writing the descriptions of what the characters do which would go in that transcript (if it existed), after your players say "[skill name]" and roll a die.

0 times do I write what they say in a fictional transcript that again i don't think anyone has...

And I'm sure you don't use this control to "gotcha" them, but they're clearly ceding control of some of their character actions to you.

no they didn't... they just chose what scene is important enough to put effort into and what one isn't so it can be glossed over...

I didint' write what they said. I never have nor would I. it just was 'off screen'

 

[Maxperson]

This is a game. Part of playing it is making decisions and adopting strategies which improve your odds of success. Whether that's taking out the enemy healer first, or researching what kind of food and wine the foreign envoy likes best, so you can make him really happy at the welcome feast before asking his help, or checking behind the curtains and under the rugs when you're searching a room to find a hidden door or compartment.

That kind of decisionmaking is much more compelling, engaging, and fun for me than the part of the game where I take a feat to increase my character's skill bonus so I roll higher on a check.

For me it's far more satisfying and fun if I move the bookcase by declaration and find the door, than if I say, "I search the room." and find it with a roll. I'm here to have fun and interact with the game world, and one of those methods involves more game world interaction than the other.

 

[Mannahnin]

no but it does require someone to read into and add that to the description... skipping the details is not adding details

I'd like you to try to keep track of our conversation rather than substituting bits of what other people wrote and acting like I said them.

I have consistently talked primarily about physical actions, where the character's position and movements (like which wall they climb over, or where they stand while a potentially hazardous object is interacted with) matter for my adjudication of any potential dangers.

I'm not talking about what the PC is saying in game. I'm talking about where they stand and move and what objects they touch, which you've made clear sometimes you have to decide, because the player doesn't and you're cool with that.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

again I can see a 'door behind the tapesty' just not having to search to find it... like having to take time stating what you are looking behind and under

I don't follow... are you now saying that you would tell your players that there is a concealed door behind a tapestry?
But you wouldn't tell them that there is a concealed door behind a bookcase? They need search behind a bookcase but not behind a tapestry?

 

[Maxperson]

I tell them that I will let them auto-succeed on some things based on their skills, abilities, and situation, so asking to make a check is asking to have a chance of failure where they wouldn't necessarily. (I will still give them auto-success if they mention a check and it occurs to me they don't need one, but it may not occur to me, so best practice is not to mention it.)

Seems to have mostly done the trick.

You would think, but some people are stuck in certain mindsets and it's hard to get them out of it. One of my players is getting much better at roleplaying, but he came from a very gamist mindset and 3e just reinforced that. I've had a lot of trouble getting him to understand the above, even though I've told it to him more than once. Heck, this last week he had his PC try to do something and he reached for the dice at the same time as I said, "Okay, it works." He blinked and was like, "It does?" It still surprises him when I just say yes, even though I have been doing this for two years now.

Actually, I did auto successes in 3e as well, but those rules codified much more rolling for things than 5e does, so my saying yes in that edition really didn't have much impact.