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

[Charlaquin]

It potentially does, based on context.

Let's say there is a tripwire in the hallway that triggers a trap. Both characters see it and it is a few inches off the floor. No roll should be necessary to step over it.

But if there was a web of tripwires you had to slither through to get to the other side without triggering the trap, then a roll would be needed.

Where I might depart from @Charlaquin is I would not differentiate between the characters who has to make the roll. If it requires a roll, everyone attempting it has to roll with the same ability versus the same DC. It may be that the 20th level rogue has no chance of failure, which is fine, but that is not the same thing as exempting them from the process.

It’s possible I’m misunderstanding you, but don’t think we differ in that. The DC doesn’t change based on who’s attempting the action. It might change based on what action they’re attempting, though personally I would argue that’s not “the” DC changing, it’s two different actions so it’s only natural that the DCs for each action might or might not be the same.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

You can just move behind the door & hope for the best.

yup that is that stealth check

Alternately if you were really stumped on what your PC might do you could make some kind of knowledge check (ie wis:stealth or wis:insight) to intuit what would be a good place to hide

this is the best answer I have read yet... mental stat plus skill to determain if you know something is chief kiss

 

[overgeeked]

For context, this mini-rant is based on an event from my Iron Gods 5E conversion campaign last night, but goes beyond that. I am starting an OSE game soon with another group of folks and I expect similar issues there.

"I make a perception check" is not a valid action declaration in any version of D&D. One does not "make a perception check." One looks around, or stops and waits and listens at the door, or moves very carefully and slowly down the corridor while testing each flagstone, or runs their fingers along the edges of the old desk, or carefully pulls one book off the shelf after another. There is no "perception check" in the fiction of the game world. Stop doing that. Tell me what you DO.

I have had this argument with players constantly, and every time remind them that they need to explain what they are doing, how they are "making a perception" check. For a couple of them, itis just ingrained 3.x habits that they are working to shake. But for a couple others they just can't seem to grok that "I make a perception check" is not an actual thing.

::sigh:: /end rant

This one is a constant pain in the tuchus. Same with basically any time the player declares they're making any check at all without bothering to describe what the character is actually doing in the fiction. Like seriously, 90% of the game is the players asking the referee questions and the referee answering them. The dice only come into it when the answer isn't obvious from the fiction. Stop trying to smash the buttons on your character sheet. Focus on the fiction.

Wow. Ten pages in one day...that's a lot.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Avatar strength does matter, in cases where the action could fail and has meaningful stakes. Player skill also matters, in trying to eliminate the chance of failure and/or stakes.

oh big pet peeve of mine here... you don't have an avatar in my games, and I don't want to play one with an Avatar (unless we are using deities and demigods) I want to be playing the character that is in the world, not me playing it

 

[Charlaquin]

so same qustion for you as the others... can I ask for help out of game... can I explain "I want to find the way to describe it so I can make a perception check to see if there is danger" can I ask teh DM that, what about other players?

I mean, sure? I think it’s weird that you’re trying to come up with way to make a perception check instead of a way to find whatever you’re looking for. For a check to be called for there must be a chance of failure and a consequence for failure. It seems pretty strange to ask the other players for advice on what your character might do that could fail and has consequences, instead of asking them for advice on what they think would be most likely to succeed. But if for some reason you want to do that, I won’t tell you you can’t.

 

[Reynard]

because in character 1 is good at hiding and one is bad at it.

this goes back to 2e and into 3e but my group had issues with player knowledge spilling over into the game and giving some player HUGE advantages... and them being rude and using the advantages to steal spotlight. What started as a safe guard rule "Sorry I don't care how swave you are and you can talk around ross's stutter but his high cha sorcerer is STILL more likeable then your low cha barbarian" started us thinking about player vs character skill.

once we started thinking about it (and even long after we split form teh problem players) we kept it. We found people were more willing to stretch out and think about what there character could or could not do not what they could or could not describe. It also helped the DMs figure out when and when not to call for rolls (although we still are not all 100% agreeing on that even these years and editions later).

so in this case (two characters hiding from the oger cook) I would as the DM assess that the rogue that is a master sneak is going to get passed any oger that isn't very special... he just is, his thing is stealth so stealth he just rocks at. the Paladin though stealth is NOT his thing. not only is he not good at it but he has made choices that make it worse (he the player not the character... he put an 8 in dex and has armor that gives disadvantage) so the same way I feel it is doing a dissservice to teh rogue player to not give him his stealth moment, I feel that the Pally player is being given HIS moment too... this is now down to pure luck, and if with disadvantage and a -1 he beats the passive perception of the oger cook that is an AMAZING story we will tell for at least months. if he doesn't that too is just the story of the guy who isn't good at hiding trying to hide.

Interesting. I think I understand. I'm glad it works for you.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Stop trying to smash the buttons on your character sheet. Focus on the fiction.

ow two pet peeves almost back to back...

I am not smashing buttons (just like I don't have an avatar) i am playing a character and that character's skills abilities and powers are more important then anything I can do or say.

 

[Reynard]

It’s possible I’m misunderstanding you, but don’t think we differ in that. The DC doesn’t change based on who’s attempting the action. It might change based on what action they’re attempting, though personally I would argue that’s not “the” DC changing, it’s two different actions so it’s only natural that the DCs for each action might or might not be the same.

More likely I misunderstood you.

 

[Reynard]

Wow. Ten pages in one day...that's a lot.

It hasn't been a particularly productive day at the office...

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I mean, sure? I think it’s weird that you’re trying to come up with way to make a perception check instead of a way to find whatever you’re looking for.

except you know that is disingenuous... I have many times said what I am looking for 'danger'

my "I want to use my characters perception skill to look around and check for danger" in no way in something you can't understand the intent of...

For a check to be called for there must be a chance of failure and a consequence for failure.

and it's fine if your answer is 'no check needed it's safe' but if that's your answer then I get hit by a sneak attack I am going to call BS "you said no check needed"

It seems pretty strange to ask the other players for advice on what your character might do that could fail and has consequences, instead of asking them for advice on what they think would be most likely to succeed. But if for some reason you want to do that, I won’t tell you you can’t.

again you are not getting it... you can understand this intent