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

[Cadence]

And I wonder sometimes who exactly is not reading the RAW - and then decide I'm going to make my own mind up anyway about how I think it should be done. It would still be nice to be able to tell folks I'm not doing it by RAW.

 

[Reynard]

That's great. Did your nephew also remember to check behind the dresser, open each of the drawers to measure for secret compartments, pull the bedding away from the wall, lift up the mattress, rap on walls for hollow spots, etc?
No?
Then I doubt he was a rogue with trained investigation, perception, expertise in both, and reliable talent. And neither are you.

That's the difference here with some of this discussion. A skilled adventurer probably has techniques a middle aged D&D hobbyist, much less your little nephew, doesn't have when it comes to finding traps, disarming them, effectively searching a room for valuables, and many more. Is it wrong for a player to want to leverage those rather than their own?

Literally nobody is saying that. Everyone on the side of "say what you do" in this discussion has used some form of the phrase "reasonable specificity" and it is a bad faith argument to suggest otherwise.

 

[Charlaquin]

But still they do. Are the WotC police going to come and stop them?

No, but their DM might point out that it isn’t part of their role, as per the rules.

 

[Demetrios1453]

No, but their DM might point out that it isn’t part of their role, as per the rules.

Or the DM can just be fine with it, and everyone continues having fun playing the way they want to.

 

[Charlaquin]

Or the DM can just be fine with it, and everyone continues having fun playing the way they want to.

Yes, and now we have successfully described the two camps participating in this discussion.

 

[Reynard]

If you are searching repeatedly, it is impossible to have an average of 10 unless you are also rolling every other number during those checks. The 10 is just used for convenience. Actively looking around if a player states the PC is looking around would give an active perception roll if outcome is in doubt and there is a meaningful chance for failure. A PC looking around actively does not by RAW rely on passive scores, since there is no repetition involved at that moment.

I honestly don't understand how you come to this conclusion. The rules are clear anthe repeated action part, and in the exploration chapter it talks about how PCs are assumed to be moving carefully, paying attention and keeping eyes, ears and noses open for trouble. The passive check rule is a tool the GM uses to keep from having to call for rolls every 10 seconds. In the fiction the skills are used exactly the same way as an active check.

 

[Maxperson]

RAW also states that any time the players and DM agree to override RAW, it's perfectly valid for them to do so.

Sure. You can do whatever you want to your game. However, while RAW lets you make those changes, those changes don't become RAW or RAI.

The game intends for the DM to be the one to call for checks in response to what the players describe their PCs as doing.

 

[Maxperson]

View attachment 256620

And I wonder sometimes who exactly is not reading the RAW - and then decide I'm going to make my own mind up anyway about how I think it should be done. It would still be nice to be able to tell folks I'm not doing it by RAW.

One of the few times I agree with him, because it just makes tons of sense for it to be that way as written and as intended.

 

[Maxperson]

I honestly don't understand how you come to this conclusion. The rules are clear anthe repeated action part, and in the exploration chapter it talks about how PCs are assumed to be moving carefully, paying attention and keeping eyes, ears and noses open for trouble. The passive check rule is a tool the GM uses to keep from having to call for rolls every 10 seconds.

I know that. The rolls happen off screen(because they don't matter) every 10 seconds in a range of 1-20 and at the spot of the secret door, the roll at that moment is assumed to be the average of 10. If on the other hand a player says, "I'm searching this wall for secret doors," you do not use passive perception for the result.

 

[Reynard]

One of the few times I agree with him, because it just makes tons of sense for it to be that way as written and as intended.

Crawford does love to directly contradict the RAW!

I don't mean to come off as arguing that it's bad to do it that way, but it is messy as hell in play IME.

"The assassin strikes from the shadows!"
"Wait, why didn't I get a chance to see him?"
"You did but your passive perception didn't beat his stealth."
"Crawford said I get a check anyway!"