NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8720212" data-attributes="member: 6801228">I get that everyone has their own interpretations, but just dismissing that while at the same time doubling down on "you need an action" seems like it is ignoring the actual conflict here. Because many people have responded with an action, that you have since said is not an action. And yes, again, I didn't say exactly what I am looking for... because why would I? What value do I get for saying that I'm looking for a hidden catch. instead of just asking about examining the books? By asking "do I find any hidden catches" I may get the answer of no, because the important clue on the bookshelf was the names of the titles of the books. Does looking for hidden catches also let me get that clue? Probably not in my experience, so by being more specific in what information I want, I'm doing nothing but ruining my chances of finding important information.But this is 100% the problem. Perception is the skill to find a hidden creature. It is impossible to hide without concealment or cover. If they don't have cover, they cannot be hidden, period. So, I have to do something, which isn't noticing, to use the skill for noticing. Do you see how this is a fundamental issue? You are completely cutting off the ability to utilizing the skill, by demanding a non-existent action.So, perception is a dead skill in your games, the only use of it is to increase your passive perception, because that is the only thing that ever matters. That's what I'm getting from this, because you are demanding an action, but you can't actually give any actions just "something other than trying to perceive" Because, again, as was stated earlier, if you are just passively telling them everything their perception gets them, but they know that passive is only a 10+mod, then they may want to roll because there is something they could have missed. But they can't roll, because they need to determine some action other than perception to utilize their perception.My keys are on my desk, if someone looked in my room, they might not see them, because while they are out in the open, my desk has a decent amount of clutter. But if they looked again, they might see them. The outcome is uncertain, but the action is the same. And if you have described the scene in perfect detail, with every relevant thing, but the players think something is hidden or they missed something... they may want to attempt to see the thing they missed. But that isn't an action they can take, according to you.So, punish people for declaring specific actions instead of general ones, after refusing them the chance to use general ones, to force them to keep moving. Telegraphing is important, but if you are describing an entire room in detail, they might miss you telegraphed something. They might think you telegraphed something that you didn't.They've told you what they are wanting to do. You are just refusing to allow them to do it. Trying to push them to declare specific discrete actions, instead of allowing them to make general actions. And I don't understand why.I want to know, what I don't know. How is that not clear? I, Chaosmancer the player, do not know anything about this idol beyond what you have described. Manser the Cleric of the Divine Light, probably knows a lot about religious idols. What does he know about this idol? Again, it would be stupid of me say something like "I want to know if this idol is used in fertility rituals" because then you can say "No, it doesn't appear to be" and I've completely missed that the idol is a desecrated war idol, because I didn't ask about that. But also, why would I ask about that? I have no idea what this idol is, so I don't know what to ask.So, you have never included an item of which details you didn't immediately tell the party were important? Frankly, I have a hard time believing that. If the idol is important, it is important because it is a clue or something they were sent for, and you aren't going to just tell them what the clue is and what it means for the larger situation. You keep saying you can't "read the player's mind" but it is really simple. They want to know what the important information is. You know what the important information is, because you placed that idol there for a reason. If you didn't and there is no important information, then you can just tell them "There is nothing special about the item, unless you want to know more about the deity/religion?" So, either you are telling them everything they could possibly learn from a roll, because they should know it, or you know what information they are likely asking about, because it is the stuff you didn't tell them. And if it is something they can't possibly know, you tell them there is no need to roll, because they don't know anything about it. There is no 3-D chess here, the player's mind is not some unfathomable swamp you cannot possibly understand. Their intent is very clear.How is "I want to know everything I could possibly know about this idol." so fundamentally different than "Can I roll religion?" after you finish describing the idol. Those are the exact same statements.And suddenly everyone's "friend's second-cousin's mother" gets randomly brought up because they happen to apply, to justify asking for information that they should just be able to ask for anyways. I've seen people do this, everyone just starts spouting off nonsense they forget five minutes later to try and justify making the check. No thank you. I'd rather just let you make the check. Especially since, you probably don't know everything that your character could possibly know. After all, we pick up random knowledge from everywhere.Alright, so which action would get you to call for an ability check to notice hidden things in the room you just described?So, the player doesn't roll. They just state the obvious thing they were already doing (paying attention to the NPCs body language) and you roll against a passive DC. That isn't allowing the player to roll a check. And this is especially strange since, clearly the NPC should have rolled already, because you were accounting for the player's passive insight when they started talking to the person right? You aren't waiting for an action declaration for their passive score to be applied.Okay, that's a decent usage of it. Never seen it, because nobody at my tables has ever once tried to figure out an NPC's trait, ideal, bond or flaw this way. But I could see the use case. Question. If the PC said they wanted to get the lay of the land at a party, basically getting the traits, ideals, bonds and flaws of multiple people by repeating the action over the course of several minutes, would you have them roll, or take the passive?</blockquote>

Verification