Replacing Perception with Thievery

[Kzach]

I think we can all agree that Perception is an over-used skill in the game and one upon which a LOT hinges on. If you don't agree with that statement... well... nothing to see here, move along.

Ever since 4e first came out it has seriously bugged me that rogues got the shaft when it comes to Perception. I liked having a rogue sneak around and I liked the concept of a rogue as a highly perceptive archetype. The type of dude who you could throw a knife at behind his back, without him knowing you're there, and at the last minute he spins around and grabs it, 'cause he 'sensed' he was in danger.

Danger sense seems to have gone the way of the dodo. I've argued previously to change Perception so rogues benefit but to no avail. I've since consoled myself that rogues in 4e just aren't the archetype I used to love and are another beast altogether.

But one thing that still irks me and that I can't get over or get past, is perception being used to spot traps. This just doesn't make sense. Firstly, just because someone notices something, doesn't mean they have a clue what it is. So what if Bob the Perceptive notices that there's a small hollow in the wall up ahead, smaller than a halfling's fist? He doesn't know that means there's a spear trap embedded in the wall.

So, my argument is that spotting things has nothing to do with detecting traps. Trap detection should be the sole province of Thievery. Characters with Thievery trained should be the only ones who can notice the subtle signs of a trap. Bob may see the trap, but he ignores it. Tim the Thief, however, stops Bob in his tracks and says, "Watch out! Trap!"

 

[Derulbaskul]

On my first reading, I agree with the logic of your choice. I also like the fact that it's easy to incorporate in a game simply by changing a trap's stat block.

I would possibly still allow Perception to detect traps (well, certain traps particularly non-magical ones) but have the Perception DC be Hard while the Thievery DC might be Easy (or the middle one: moderate? average?).

 

[TarionzCousin]

It sounds like a good fix to me.

Would you create a Passive Thievery score for rogues and secretly determine whether they noticed the trap or not? Then you could let them make an Active Thievery check if they said they were looking for traps.

This seems like a simpler fix than any I suggested in my thread.

My first reading also says that this is a good house rule. If I change my mind, I'll let you know.

 

[ravenheart]

Reading this thread, I suddenly had an epiphany of sorts:

What if there was no specific Perception skill, or at least not in the sense we know it now?

What if, and bear with me on this one, your awareness of your surroundings and the task at hand are based on a skill applicable to the situation?
I.e. if you are in a natural enviroment, Nature is the go to perception check, while Streetwise would be used in an urban setting. Thievery would go hand in hand with checking for traps and History could be used to find the appropriate inaccuracies in the librarys filing systems and the discrepancies in the frescoes of the church, revealing a lost journal or a hidden door.

One could possibly apply this to Insight as well, having either interactive skills be based on the origin of the species or by using social skills to counter each other (e.g. Bluff vs Bluff etc.). I guess this requires some further thought.

As for mechanics, items/backgrounds etc. that give bonuses or options when making perception checks would work as situational bonuses to any applicable skills. There might be things that break this, but those can be dealt with individually.


So, am I completely bonkers or is this something that could actually work?

 

[Kzach]

So, am I completely bonkers or is this something that could actually work?

That's a tough question to answer because on the one hand, I really like the idea, but on the other, I'm pretty insane myself

 

[Merlin the Tuna]

What if, and bear with me on this one, your awareness of your surroundings and the task at hand are based on a skill applicable to the situation?

In a lot of ways, this would be a good way to do it. Where you run into trouble is with the more mundane stuff like looting through someone's office, which doesn't really fall nicely under any of the existing skills.

 

[Stalker0]

Reading this thread, I suddenly had an epiphany of sorts:

What if there was no specific Perception skill, or at least not in the sense we know it now?

Its an interesting idea, it deserves its own thread so we refocus on the original OP.

To the OP, I think its a solid idea. I also like the idea mentioned above about allowing perception and thievery but thievery gets a much easier DC.

 

[Kzach]

To the OP, I think its a solid idea. I also like the idea mentioned above about allowing perception and thievery but thievery gets a much easier DC.

That could work for raven's idea as well.

Perception would still have it's place, as a catch-all. But someone specialised will pick up on clues that a generalist won't.

In a lot of ways, this would be a good way to do it. Where you run into trouble is with the more mundane stuff like looting through someone's office, which doesn't really fall nicely under any of the existing skills.

I think it would more depend on just how broad an interpretation of the applicability of skills to certain situations. For instance, in your situation, I could see using several different skills for several different results. Thievery to find something 'valuable' in the office, history to find something 'noteworthy' and perception as a generalised 'find something... interesting'.

 

[Arlough]

Theivery vs. Perception

Early on in my game, we determined that you can use Theivery in place of Perception to locate traps, but only if you were trained in Theivery. The arguement being that you would know where to look and what you were looking for, therefore you could focus your efforts.

The arguement that a player with a high perception might spot the trap, but not recognize it is compelling, and initially I was ready to adopt a lower DC for Theivery into the house rules.
But after considering it a bit more, I realize that adventureres are really paranoid. It comes with the job for any adventurer living all the way to 1st level, and especially those living beyond 1st. It just gets really tiring rollplaying that all the time.

So to sum it up. I think being trained in Theivery should let you use that in place of a perception check, but if the trap doesn't look like a trap, then it is a higher DC to spot trap.

 

[LostSoul]

What if there was no specific Perception skill, or at least not in the sense we know it now?

My hack takes this idea as far as it will go - I removed all the specific skills and replaced them with descriptions of a character's skill.

There are other steps you need to take - you can't use 4E's default of "You make a check when you use a skill", so you need to define when skill checks are made.

It has worked for us.

An actual play example: One of the party's henchmen has a skill called "Guild Thief". He was checking a door for traps. Since that skill was applicable to the situation, he got to add the skill's modifier to his d20 roll.

The other perceptive guy in the party is the elf with a skill called "Keen Elven Eyesight" (assuming Blinding Sickness doesn't ravage his eyesight). Now if he were the one checking the door for traps, I would have ruled that "Keen Elven Eyesight" wasn't appropriate, though it's "associated" and he could get a +2 bonus.

If, instead of checking the door for traps, he decided to pore over every inch of the door, I'd allow Keen Eleven Eyesight to apply, though the result of success would be different - he wouldn't have found the trap, but he would have found signs of the trap. In this case, something like noticing that the hinges aren't actually connected to the door. (It was a collapsing door trap; you pull on it, it falls on you. Nothing but a stone wall behind it.)