Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
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="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8721077" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>But their goal was to get different results, and you are denying that goal. So their action failed.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Then why are they bothering to search for clues if there are no clues?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I frankly don't know why either. I know I can be a bit bullheaded and argumentative, but I approach every discussion completely honestly and openly. And yet every discussion ends up with me being accused of being nothing but a troll who never bothers to read anyone's posts, even after I spend literal hours typing up responses. </p><p></p><p>It is part of why I left the site for a few months, and was dreading coming back to ask for homebrew advice, because it always devolves into personal attacks. </p><p></p><p></p><p>The reason I kept asking you though, is because we have established the player wants to roll the dice to get a different result than what was narrated. They have attempted to take an action, and you have said that that action does not lead to a different result. And, the more I ask, the more it seems like you would never allow them to roll. The only thing I can begin to figure is, much like Reynard, you are utilizing perception when I would consider it investigation, and then I don't know when you would be utilizing investigation. And yes, I know you ask for the ability check, not the skill, but it is far easier to talk about this in terms of the skills because specific actions lead to specific ability checks. You don't allow people to use arcana when they shoulder charge a door, so it is easier to use the skill names when talking about actions that lead to rolls that might apply proficiency.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>These statements appear contradictory to me. They can't take "literally any action they want" to get the roll because the action they want has already been narrated without a roll. So what else can they do?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But again, The perception proficiency is literally for noticing things. It is for seeing. It is for hearing. It is for smelling. If you have already accounted for everything they could see or hear, without having a roll, then they cannot use their abilities to detect things they have missed. </p><p></p><p>For an example, expecting that the goblin that ran away is preparing an ambush, the bard gives the fighter inspiration, so they can spot the goblin. They open the door, you describe the room. They don't see the goblin. But that's what they want to do, that's why the bard gave them inspiration, but they can't use Inspiration until they roll the dice. But if they walk into the room to start kicking crates or opening dressers, or taking any "action" other than looking around, then they are just going to trigger the ambush and not get to spot it before hand, which is again the goal. So, we have our fighter, who wants to use these abilities they have to spot an enemy before they are ambushed, and they don't want to enter the room before they spot the enemy. What can they do? If they just say they look for the goblin, you have already narrated that result and they can't find it. So what options do they have here?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I do think that a failed check doesn't always have consequences, because many times consequences don't make sense for the check. Knowledge skills are literally thinking or remembering. I can't give consequences for "failing to know something" unless I want to give the players false information. Which is pointless, because then they have to try pretend they don't know they just learned something stupid. Perception checks are literally just seeing or hearing things. What consequences can I give for failing to hear? Same with insight. </p><p></p><p>Failure is the consequence many times. Just like I don't give consequences for missing an attack roll in combat. Missing was the consequence.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>They do want different results than your narration. That's what they are trying to achieve. Saying "you did that and I told you the results" is effectively the same as saying "no, try something else" because in both cases you are not telling them new information, they are failing their goal, and you are asking for a different action than the only action they can think of. </p><p></p><p>And yes, I haven't given you a different action, because I can't think of another action that would let me see something other than looking with my eyes. That's how seeing works. If you need a different action, tell me what other actions than looking will allow me to see something.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Some players aren't going to be good at picking up telegraphing and clues in the environment. There are a multitude of very good reasons for that. So, they may ask for a check to allow them to narrow in on those telegraphed clues. And that is fine in my opinion.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So, to me, this is all bonkers. If this idol is literally so unimportant that it has no significance to anything, then when the players ask to roll, just tell them the idol is set dressing. If they had any questions about the goddess it represents or something, I wouldn't even bother asking them how they might know the information, I'd just tell them. Because it literally doesn't matter.</p><p></p><p>When you first gave this example, you seemed to be indicating that this idol was some sort of clue to a deeper plot. Hence references to whether or not it was desecrated, which indicate a clue to something else. But now you are telling me you literally have no idea why this idol even exists, it was basically just from a random chart and means nothing. But if this is how you handle knowledge skill proficiencies... again, I'm just not sure what the point of them is. It feels like "I studied in a temple" is good enough to get all the possible information about any religious items they find, and so they will never need to roll religion to see if they know something. (Yes, again, I know you would ask them to roll an intelligence ability check and they would ask if their religion proficiency would apply, I understand the cycle) Which simply isn't how I've ever seen the game played, and wasn't what I was understanding from you when this line of inquiry started.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But passive skills aren't meant to prevent active use of skills, which is exactly what is happening here.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>How do you telegraph things in the room if you have no plan for what is important in the room? To my mind, you can't. Which means you have to know what is in the room that is notable. Unless you are doing full quantum DMing where you don't know if there is a trap on the chest until they try and open it, fail, and the trap is the result of that failure. </p><p></p><p>But if you don't do that, and you know what is in the room, then you should be able to figure out some actions that would discover that information. This doesn't prevent you from being surprised with a "oh, that would work" but it does give you a baseline from which you can have this discussion. Instead, you just keep repeating that you have no idea what actions are even possible, because knowing that the players want to spot something they missed doesn't give you any information on what actions they are taking.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Except that every perception, insight and knowledge skill proficiency seems to be HEAVILY reliant on just the passive scores, and I have yet to figure out how I would actively roll those in your game, except for asking very specific questions, which may or may not give me any important information.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>By doing what? I've asked for examples again and again and again. Can I get some?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8721077, member: 6801228"] But their goal was to get different results, and you are denying that goal. So their action failed. Then why are they bothering to search for clues if there are no clues? I frankly don't know why either. I know I can be a bit bullheaded and argumentative, but I approach every discussion completely honestly and openly. And yet every discussion ends up with me being accused of being nothing but a troll who never bothers to read anyone's posts, even after I spend literal hours typing up responses. It is part of why I left the site for a few months, and was dreading coming back to ask for homebrew advice, because it always devolves into personal attacks. The reason I kept asking you though, is because we have established the player wants to roll the dice to get a different result than what was narrated. They have attempted to take an action, and you have said that that action does not lead to a different result. And, the more I ask, the more it seems like you would never allow them to roll. The only thing I can begin to figure is, much like Reynard, you are utilizing perception when I would consider it investigation, and then I don't know when you would be utilizing investigation. And yes, I know you ask for the ability check, not the skill, but it is far easier to talk about this in terms of the skills because specific actions lead to specific ability checks. You don't allow people to use arcana when they shoulder charge a door, so it is easier to use the skill names when talking about actions that lead to rolls that might apply proficiency. These statements appear contradictory to me. They can't take "literally any action they want" to get the roll because the action they want has already been narrated without a roll. So what else can they do? But again, The perception proficiency is literally for noticing things. It is for seeing. It is for hearing. It is for smelling. If you have already accounted for everything they could see or hear, without having a roll, then they cannot use their abilities to detect things they have missed. For an example, expecting that the goblin that ran away is preparing an ambush, the bard gives the fighter inspiration, so they can spot the goblin. They open the door, you describe the room. They don't see the goblin. But that's what they want to do, that's why the bard gave them inspiration, but they can't use Inspiration until they roll the dice. But if they walk into the room to start kicking crates or opening dressers, or taking any "action" other than looking around, then they are just going to trigger the ambush and not get to spot it before hand, which is again the goal. So, we have our fighter, who wants to use these abilities they have to spot an enemy before they are ambushed, and they don't want to enter the room before they spot the enemy. What can they do? If they just say they look for the goblin, you have already narrated that result and they can't find it. So what options do they have here? I do think that a failed check doesn't always have consequences, because many times consequences don't make sense for the check. Knowledge skills are literally thinking or remembering. I can't give consequences for "failing to know something" unless I want to give the players false information. Which is pointless, because then they have to try pretend they don't know they just learned something stupid. Perception checks are literally just seeing or hearing things. What consequences can I give for failing to hear? Same with insight. Failure is the consequence many times. Just like I don't give consequences for missing an attack roll in combat. Missing was the consequence. They do want different results than your narration. That's what they are trying to achieve. Saying "you did that and I told you the results" is effectively the same as saying "no, try something else" because in both cases you are not telling them new information, they are failing their goal, and you are asking for a different action than the only action they can think of. And yes, I haven't given you a different action, because I can't think of another action that would let me see something other than looking with my eyes. That's how seeing works. If you need a different action, tell me what other actions than looking will allow me to see something. Some players aren't going to be good at picking up telegraphing and clues in the environment. There are a multitude of very good reasons for that. So, they may ask for a check to allow them to narrow in on those telegraphed clues. And that is fine in my opinion. So, to me, this is all bonkers. If this idol is literally so unimportant that it has no significance to anything, then when the players ask to roll, just tell them the idol is set dressing. If they had any questions about the goddess it represents or something, I wouldn't even bother asking them how they might know the information, I'd just tell them. Because it literally doesn't matter. When you first gave this example, you seemed to be indicating that this idol was some sort of clue to a deeper plot. Hence references to whether or not it was desecrated, which indicate a clue to something else. But now you are telling me you literally have no idea why this idol even exists, it was basically just from a random chart and means nothing. But if this is how you handle knowledge skill proficiencies... again, I'm just not sure what the point of them is. It feels like "I studied in a temple" is good enough to get all the possible information about any religious items they find, and so they will never need to roll religion to see if they know something. (Yes, again, I know you would ask them to roll an intelligence ability check and they would ask if their religion proficiency would apply, I understand the cycle) Which simply isn't how I've ever seen the game played, and wasn't what I was understanding from you when this line of inquiry started. But passive skills aren't meant to prevent active use of skills, which is exactly what is happening here. How do you telegraph things in the room if you have no plan for what is important in the room? To my mind, you can't. Which means you have to know what is in the room that is notable. Unless you are doing full quantum DMing where you don't know if there is a trap on the chest until they try and open it, fail, and the trap is the result of that failure. But if you don't do that, and you know what is in the room, then you should be able to figure out some actions that would discover that information. This doesn't prevent you from being surprised with a "oh, that would work" but it does give you a baseline from which you can have this discussion. Instead, you just keep repeating that you have no idea what actions are even possible, because knowing that the players want to spot something they missed doesn't give you any information on what actions they are taking. Except that every perception, insight and knowledge skill proficiency seems to be HEAVILY reliant on just the passive scores, and I have yet to figure out how I would actively roll those in your game, except for asking very specific questions, which may or may not give me any important information. By doing what? I've asked for examples again and again and again. Can I get some? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
"I make a perception check."
Top