Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
"I make a perception check."
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 8718777" data-attributes="member: 6987520"><p>While I understand your rant, I don't really think it's fair.</p><p></p><p>::begin counter-rant:: <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p>A lot of people play in terms of expressing mechanics and systems, not just giving narratives. The general statement "I make a perception check" is just another way of saying "I look around and see what I see, hear what I hear, and so forth, to see if anything strikes me as odd or out of place." There is no need to declare that statement over and over again when they don't want something specific IMO. Now, if they want something specific, maybe explain that to them?</p><p></p><p>When describing an attack, you might say "I attack the chimera" but then are you going be nit-picky and say, "With what?" to which the player will respond, "Duh, with my longsword!" And then you continue, "How with your longsword?" And the player gets up and vents <em>their</em> frustration on you insisting that they expound on every action they want their character to take when their intent is obvious. You don't have to say, "I attack the chimera by swinging my longsword in a wide arc hoping to lob off one of its head."</p><p></p><p>However, players understand if you are attacking for a specific purpose, "I want to knock the guard prone," you have to state that is the intent of your attack. But IMO it is just as valid to say, "I want to take the Attack action and use my attack to try to knock the guard prone."</p><p></p><p>Now, back to the perception issue. With such a broad, non-specific action I am only going to reveal superficial information based on their ability check result. <em>IF</em> the player wants to be more specific, then that is great, and I will gear the results towards their specific action, such as "I look for a hidden latch in the bookcase".</p><p></p><p>Anyway, it really depends on the player IME. Some love to be descriptive in what they are doing, others prefer mechanic/system expressions. I often see it more in newer players, but even veterans can "short-hand" their actions from time to time. I explain to players that the more general their statements, the more general the response. If they want specifics, get specific.</p><p></p><p>::end counter-rant::</p><p></p><p>Finally, you can just stare at them blankly when they make such a statement as "I make a perception check" and wait for them to elaborate. <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤷♂️" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f937-2642.png" title="Man shrugging :man_shrugging:" data-shortname=":man_shrugging:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DND_Reborn, post: 8718777, member: 6987520"] While I understand your rant, I don't really think it's fair. ::begin counter-rant:: ;) A lot of people play in terms of expressing mechanics and systems, not just giving narratives. The general statement "I make a perception check" is just another way of saying "I look around and see what I see, hear what I hear, and so forth, to see if anything strikes me as odd or out of place." There is no need to declare that statement over and over again when they don't want something specific IMO. Now, if they want something specific, maybe explain that to them? When describing an attack, you might say "I attack the chimera" but then are you going be nit-picky and say, "With what?" to which the player will respond, "Duh, with my longsword!" And then you continue, "How with your longsword?" And the player gets up and vents [I]their[/I] frustration on you insisting that they expound on every action they want their character to take when their intent is obvious. You don't have to say, "I attack the chimera by swinging my longsword in a wide arc hoping to lob off one of its head." However, players understand if you are attacking for a specific purpose, "I want to knock the guard prone," you have to state that is the intent of your attack. But IMO it is just as valid to say, "I want to take the Attack action and use my attack to try to knock the guard prone." Now, back to the perception issue. With such a broad, non-specific action I am only going to reveal superficial information based on their ability check result. [I]IF[/I] the player wants to be more specific, then that is great, and I will gear the results towards their specific action, such as "I look for a hidden latch in the bookcase". Anyway, it really depends on the player IME. Some love to be descriptive in what they are doing, others prefer mechanic/system expressions. I often see it more in newer players, but even veterans can "short-hand" their actions from time to time. I explain to players that the more general their statements, the more general the response. If they want specifics, get specific. ::end counter-rant:: Finally, you can just stare at them blankly when they make such a statement as "I make a perception check" and wait for them to elaborate. 🤷♂️ [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
"I make a perception check."
Top