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

[Reynard]

Players can use shorthand. They can say "When I say I am looking around, it means I stop and shush everyone else, then listen. I make sure to always look at the ceiling, behind the door and into any dark corners but I DON'T move into the room until after you tell me what I see." This is great information for the GM -- who will incorporate it into each individual adjudication.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I don't think anyone in this thread is asking for this level of specificity (although I have seen it at some tables). "I want to try and determine if the hallways is safe. I am going to move slowly and examine as I go," is totally sufficient.

no I doubt many would require that... I was saying sometimes I feel like my fun and/or the table fun would be me being wordy and describing in detail a cool momnet... but sometimes I am tired, and we as a table just want to move on, and "Traps?" and holding up a d20 gets the intent across

 

[Charlaquin]

I don't think anyone in this thread is asking for this level of specificity (although I have seen it at some tables). "I want to try and determine if the hallways is safe. I am going to move slowly and examine as I go," is totally sufficient.

True, though if a player was that specific with an action declaration I wouldn’t have a problem with it. Such a specific action would be very likely to result success or failure without a roll, since it leaves very little room for uncertainty in what the outcome would be. This makes it a potentially very effective strategy, if you have good reason to believe the action will succeed.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

As long as it’s obvious what target you’re attacking (which to be clear, it usually is in my experience.)

the hardest thing in every one of these discussion is context...

on game night 17 (4 levels of play) on the second session of this part of the adventure an hour into the night there is A LOT of context that we just can not give on these forums.

 

[Reynard]

I don't know.. I do not have this skill in real life that my character does, I can no more describe how the character is perceiving a threat then I can describe how they alter reality, or how they make successful attacks, or how they place a blow to deal more damage, but the CHARACTER can do those things I just want to do a thing the character can do.

I get what you're saying, but to properly adjudicate any situation there is a minimum level of information the GM needs to know. So a simple "I roll perception" statement doesn't qualify. I need to know where you are and very generally what actions you are taking. It might matter a lot.

 

[Reynard]

True, though if a player was that specific with an action declaration I wouldn’t have a problem with it. Such a specific would be very likely to result success or failure without a roll, since it leaves very little room for uncertainty in what the outcome would be. This makes it a potentially very effective strategy, if you have good reason to believe the action will succeed.

I think that level of specificity is counter productive, if only because players can convince themselves of thing and run after a red herring. A slightly more general declaration from the rogue of, "I pull out my tools and probe the door for traps," is better, IMO.

 

[Jer]

the hardest thing in every one of these discussion is context...

on game night 17 (4 levels of play) on the second session of this part of the adventure an hour into the night there is A LOT of context that we just can not give on these forums.

There's no better evidence for the fact that D&D isn't one single game it's hundreds or thousands of different games than participating in threads around here.

People can be using the same set of rules, but every table runs a different game. And that always becomes clear as people in these threads provide more and more context about how they run/play their own games.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I would say the way to get more parity between what the player and character knows is to explore the world by taking action within it with reasonable specificity. Hopefully the DM is being generous with information and consistent in their adjudication.

I don't see why that generous DM can't extend it to taking the context and helping do something...

would you let the +15 stealth rogue who the player doesn't know how to hide ask teh table "Hey guys ideas, what should my character do I don't know how to describe hideing?"

If it is indeed the "perfect hiding place," then I don't see why we're rolling.

to see how well the character does what the player described... is there a bit of plate esposed, did they make a noise, did they leave heavy foot prints... aka how well teh skill used

And the rogue's description is indeed lacking in my view. I can't determine if they have total cover or are quiet because they are not declaring an action with reasonable specificity. For all I know, they are standing in plain sight on a pile of crunchy leaves, and I don't want to establish or assume their action for them. Do better, player!

so how do you teach that player to do better? can he ask "Hey as DM what should I be doing?" or like above can he ask the other players?

 

[Reynard]

There's no better evidence for the fact that D&D isn't one single game it's hundreds or thousands of different games than participating in threads around here.

People can be using the same set of rules, but every table runs a different game. And that always becomes clear as people in these threads provide more and more context about how they run/play their own games.

A long time ago I read something that said D&D is much closer to a toy than a game and it stuck with me: you use toys to make your own fun.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

True, though if a player was that specific with an action declaration I wouldn’t have a problem with it. Such a specific would be very likely to result success or failure without a roll, since it leaves very little room for uncertainty in what the outcome would be. This makes it a potentially very effective strategy, if you have good reason to believe the action will succeed.

but would it be equally good for a 20th level rogue with maxed out stats and skills and a ton of experence as a 1st level wizard who never stepped foot in a dungeon has no stat or skill bonus to finding traps? does the characters skill matter at all?