Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="weldon" data-source="post: 6509074" data-attributes="member: 18817">You want random chance in traps. That's fine. I'm just saying to put the outcome in the players hands instead of the DMs.I was trying to make a particular point about how PP and chance could interact. If you use PP to determine if they notice the trap, you can still decide how to describe it to best move the story forward. If it's important to introduce some risk and make the results random, just tell them something is off and have them roll an investigation check. The players have determined the result of the randomness instead of the DM. If you don't need randomness there, just describe the situation more directly (you see a tripwire across the hallway that you can easily step over). I'm not arguing that DMs don't have choices about how to describe things when you use active perception checks or random DCs, I was commenting on how the two ideas interact so you can still introduce random chance with investigation checks while also using passive perception.Sure, if I want a trap to go off, I can always set the DC beyond their reach, even with dice rolls. If I think some risk is going to be fun, I ask for a check. If I want to recognize the player that poured tons of resources into passive perception, I tell her that she notices something is off. I then ask her to roll to see if she avoids the trap or walks right into it. I'm deciding when there should be risk and letting the players determine the outcome of that random chance with their dice rolls. I'm also acknowledging the player(s) that put resources into perception.One detail here - if multiple players beat the DC, I think it's fun to rotate which player gets the information instead of always revealing the info to the player with the highest perception (or just giving it to the whole table).If I want to nudge the players, I just nudge them with the description of the room, or the reaction to their choices. What does that have to do with using PP instead of random DCs?The essential difference I still see in our approach is that you want random chance to influence outcomes in trap encounters and you think the DM should determine the outcome by rolling the DC against the players passive perception. I think the DM should set the DCs but still retain control over what passive perception reveals to the player(s). If there ought to be some risk in this moment of the game, the players determine the outcome by rolling an active check against the DC the DM has set.If I've misunderstood your position, I apologize in advance and would like to learn more.</blockquote>

Verification