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

[Medic]

I'm sure you are a saint who never gets annoyed or aggravated with anyone after a week plus of arguing the same points and hitting dead-end after dead-end.

But, sure, I'm the bad guy. Might as well get a tattoo and a theme song at this point.

If I spent a day entangled in an argument on the internet, I would take a moment to remember that the other party's palms are sweaty, knees weak, arms are heavy, vomit on their sweater already (mom's spaghetti), then close the thread and probably never bother looking at it again. Heck, I'd do that if I spent more than three posts arguing fruitlessly with someone.

What I'm saying is, it's important to know when to bow out of a discussion that doesn't seem to be going anywhere.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

If this thread has taught me anything it is that more words does not equate to more communication. Oof.

Also, the more specific you feel you have to get to get your audience to understand what you are saying, the less likely that they are listening or engaging in good faith.

It's ironic because it's the forum equivalent of the "pixelbitching" some folks are decrying in this thread.

Maybe we can return to talking about the ACTUAL thread topic, which isn't really about Perception at all: players don't declare dice rolls, they declare actions, and GMs decide on what dice rolls, if any, are necessary. This is an interesting discussion, I think, because we can talk about traditional games versus story games versus player empowerment, with a healthy dose of prep vs "play to find out" thrown in.

This ever tightening spiral discussion about Perception is going nowhere very, very slowly.

There was this thread from several years back with many a solid contribution from some of the DMs sharing in this current thread. And, of course, the not surprising pushback from at least one poster. (As well as me referring to ability checks as "skill checks" in my early years of 5e DMing... ack!)

D&D 5E - Players Self-Assigning Rolls

DM describes a scene, players say what they want to do and how they want to do it, and DM determines success or failure or if a roll is needed because something interesting can happen because of the roll. As much as I reiterate this flow, I still get experienced players who throw down some dice...

www.enworld.org

 

[Maxperson]

Sure, but again, Wisdom being tied as your second highest stat is pretty important. And getting a 16 instead of a 14 isn't nearly as good as getting proficiency in wisdom saves.

Sure, but getting +1 to wisdom saves, +1 to perception, +1 to animal handling, +1 to insight, +1 to medicine, and +1 to survival is better(in my opinion) than proficiency with wisdom saves.

 

[Maxperson]

If it was easier to get proficiency in Wisdom saves, you'd be seeing people do that as well. I have no data, but I'm willing to bet that people who take Resilient choose Con or Wis more than any other save.

I'll bet a comparable number choose Dex as well, depending on class saves. Int, Str and Cha are saves that I've never seen chose with that feat.

 

[James Gasik]

I'll bet a comparable number choose Dex as well, depending on class saves. Int, Str and Cha are saves that I've never seen chose with that feat.

Maybe? Dex saves are common, but they usually only prevent damage, right? Con and Wis saves do....other things that can be worse than taking damage.

 

[Maxperson]

FWIW, I can tell you flat out it is CON 90% of the time IME.

The +1 bump often leads to more HP, and out of all the casters and half-casters in the game (67% of classes), only 1 has proficiency in CON saves (the Sorcerer). Only 3 classes (Barbarian, Fighter, and Sorcerer) have CON save proficiency.

In summary:
STR - 4
DEX - 4
CON - 3
INT - 3
WIS - 5
CHA - 5

Looks like you left out Artificer, which has Con and Int as saves, so both those 3's become 4's.

 

[Maxperson]

Maybe? Dex saves are common, but they usually only prevent damage, right? Con and Wis saves do....other things that can be worse than taking damage.

Damage prevention, but also a lot of trap saves are dex based and can put someone in a very bad position that they might not be able to escape from. You fall into a resetting pit trap with smooth walls and silence at the bottom and you may never be found.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Looks like you left out Artificer, which has Con and Int as saves, so both those 3's become 4's.

I ALWAYS DO.

 

[Bill Zebub]

And people have to really learn that some people just don't get much out of some things of this nature. I can get some fun under limited circumstances from figuring out what's going on, but its limited, and actual puzzle solving just bores me to tears. If a GM is really fixed on that sort of thing, we're probably a mismatch, but until that's obvious, I'm probably going to do a lot of things to try to just engage with it on a character level to get to the parts of the game I do like. And I can't imagine I'm alone.

So I'll add here that, for all my defense of "figuring out" challenges, I really don't like traditional D&D dungeon puzzles. You know, the sort of thing like "There are three columns, colored yellow, purple, green. On a pedestal are three gems..."

Blech. I hate those puzzles that have a single solution you're supposed to find, and is invariably too hard or too easy. And if you think of a good idea, there is no "close enough". It's just wrong.

(And, as an aside, why didn't the Archmage just put a good padlock on his laboratory?)

I kind of tune out when that stuff comes along, and let other people solve it. (Or just start hitting it all with my Shatterspike, if I'm playing that character.)

The kind of challenges I am talking about in this thread, and that I think @Charlaquin is talking about also, are not that. Instead of having a single, prescribed solution, it's just...a problem, with open-ended solutions. Maybe there are no good solutions. Maybe the best solution is for the barbarian to rage and then run through the gauntlet, toughing it out. Or maybe they instantly come up with a super simple and obvious solution that the DM didn't think of.

The point is the goal isn't to design a challenge with a specific solution. It's to design a challenge, period. Then see what happens. And I, at least, find that to be way more fun than the traditional single-solution dungeon "puzzle."

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Mod Note:

Someone got reported for making things personal. I came to look, and found it to be true.

I ALSO found there was more than one person guilty of that offense.

Right now, I’m not having the best day, so in order to show myself that I can exercise impartial restraint, I’m asking once, nicely, that said shenanigans stop. Please don’t make me come back.