Perception is not Search.


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 79 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
The Exchange

Gnomezrule wrote:

All searches are perceptions.

Not all perceptions are searches.

I would except this, but would have to say that some of the Perception DCs are very low. Like maybe -10? or -20?

Theres a dead body under the bed... a search SHOULD turn this up. (Realizing my kids could easily miss it if I sent them in to look for it).


nosig wrote:
Gnomezrule wrote:

All searches are perceptions.

Not all perceptions are searches.

I would except this, but would have to say that some of the Perception DCs are very low. Like maybe -10? or -20?

Theres a dead body under the bed... a search SHOULD turn this up. (Realizing my kids could easily miss it if I sent them in to look for it).

That is why there is a DM.

Senario 1
Player: I poke my head in the door and look around a sec.
DM: Roll perception
Player: 17
DM: You see something shiny like a buckle under the bed.

Senario 2 (Lets say they failed the check above originally now come back to more thoroughly search.)
Player: I have been here before I am going to go through the furniture.
DM: When you get to the bed you find a body.

The Exchange

Gnomezrule wrote:
nosig wrote:
Gnomezrule wrote:

All searches are perceptions.

Not all perceptions are searches.

I would except this, but would have to say that some of the Perception DCs are very low. Like maybe -10? or -20?

Theres a dead body under the bed... a search SHOULD turn this up. (Realizing my kids could easily miss it if I sent them in to look for it).

That is why there is a DM.

Senario 1
Player: I poke my head in the door and look around a sec.
DM: Roll perception
Player: 17
DM: You see something shiny like a buckle under the bed.

Senario 2 (Lets say they failed the check above originally now come back to more thoroughly search.)
Player: I have been here before I am going to go through the furniture.
DM: When you get to the bed you find a body.

I agree with you...

It's just that lately I've noticed it working like this:

Player: I take 10 on a Perception check from the doorway...
Judge: You see soemthing shiny like metal under the bed.
Player: I take 20 on a perception check from the doorway:
Judge:: Do you realize how long that will take? and there are buff spells running -
Player: It only takes a minute.
Judge: there is no way you can search this room in a minute! It will take you at least -
Player: But I only want to take 20 on -
Judge: exactly! weren't you listening to the distription of the room - there are bookshelves lining all the walls, and drawers you need to open -
Player: I only want to take a minute to look around -
Judge: What are you trying to pull? A minute to look and you see what I discribed, now if we can get back to the other players and get on with the game!
Player (well cowed now): sorry... it wont happen again.

that's the way it's gone the last few times I've tried to take 20 on a perception check from a door way of a room... each time with different judges and the last time with a VO. It's making me question playing with people I don't normally play with....

I've even been "corrected" once when I was judging, when the trapfinder in the group looked into a room and said "Taking 20 looking around..." the player beside him said "we don't have time for that! I move into the room to cover the other door". When asked he said "it would take an hour to search the room from the doorway..." After all, that's what Taking 20 on a Perception check means right? (yeah, that last was sarcasm... sorry)


Yes, there are a lot of horrible DMs.

I once had a guy make me make a perception check to see my party, sitting at a table, in the centre of an empty bar.

The Exchange

mephnick wrote:

Yes, there are a lot of horrible DMs.

I once had a guy make me make a perception check to see my party, sitting at a table, in the centre of an empty bar.

but what was the DC? this would be no problem (normally) if the DC was 0 or less and you could take 10 right?


Scavion wrote:
blahpers wrote:
You can take 20 and search the entire room from where you're standing in one minute. Range penalties still apply, of course, so if the room is large enough for this to be a potential issue then you may wish to spend a few minutes doing so from multiple vantage points.
Yep. Makes trapfinding a breeze too.

A slow breeze, though. I'd rather just pick up Trap Spotter, ask the GM to have me take 10 on it unless otherwise specified, and get on with the adventure. It's much easier for the GM; they don't have to roll any secret dice and instead can just star all the traps that I'll find if I get within 10 feet.


nosig wrote:
mephnick wrote:

Yes, there are a lot of horrible DMs.

I once had a guy make me make a perception check to see my party, sitting at a table, in the centre of an empty bar.

but what was the DC? this would be no problem (normally) if the DC was 0 or less and you could take 10 right?

Pretty sure he was just making stuff up as he went along and had no idea. He was not willing to listen to complaints. It was one session and I could type an essay on it. This was the last PUG I played in.

Hence, why I've resigned myself to GMing 100% of the time.


nosig wrote:

I agree with you...

It's just that lately I've noticed it working like this:

Player: I take 10 on a Perception check from the doorway...
Judge: You see soemthing shiny like metal under the bed.
Player: I take 20 on a perception check from the doorway:
Judge:: Do you realize how long that will take? and there are buff spells running -
Player: It only takes a minute.
Judge: there is no way you can search this room in a minute! It will take you at least -
Player: But I only want to take 20 on -
Judge: exactly! weren't you listening to the distription of the room - there are bookshelves lining all the walls, and drawers you need to open -
Player: I only want to take a minute to look around -
Judge: What are you trying to pull? A minute to look and you see what I discribed, now if we can get back to the other players and get on with the game!
Player (well cowed now): sorry... it wont happen again.

that's the way it's gone the last few times I've tried to take 20 on a perception check from a door way of a room... each time with different judges and the last time with a VO. It's making me question playing with people I don't normally play with....

I've even been "corrected" once when I was judging, when the trapfinder in the group looked into a room and said "Taking 20 looking around..." the player beside him said "we don't have time for that! I move into the room to cover the other door". When asked he said "it would take an hour to search the room from the doorway..." After all, that's what Taking 20 on a Perception check means right? (yeah, that last was sarcasm... sorry)

Mmmm.

Can you quote the bit that says you can use Perception on everything in a room in 1 minute? I mean, specifically. I ask this because I'm pretty sure the same rule you're going to quote applies equally well to finding everything in a dungeon. Or on a continent. I mean, yeah, there's a wall in the way, so the DC goes up by 10 but hey, that's easy to ace when you're taking 20 and have maxed out Perception.

You see, it's not unreasonable to a GM to assign a reasonable amount of time and number of checks required to find stuff. That's pretty much what the GM's job is... to translate how the rules apply to the reality of the situation.

If I had a player who said "only want to take a minute" and expected to do the room, we'd have a talk.

To be clear, I'm totally okay with in-plain-sight stuff. Even some hidden doors. But if there's a trap-door under the rug under the desk, there isn't line-of-sight so you can't see it. Sorry. All the take-20 at the doorway you want isn't going to find it. And if you go back to take-10-as-you-walk and miss it, that's on you.

Bottom line is that you can use Perception to spot or to listen, and this is passive and quick. You can take some time on it (take 20) by shushing your friends while you listen at the door, or covering your eyes to avoid glare from sunlight or whatever, but these are still simple wide-area uses of the skill. If you want to do this from multiple points-of-view in a room, perhaps tapping at walls to discover hollow spaces behind them, you're going to take a lot of time.

So when the GM tells the player "that will take too much time", just specify "I just mean to spot, not to search". Problem solved.

It's not bad GMs. It's bad groups who are evidently not communicating, for some bizarre reason.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Anguish wrote:

Mmmm.

Can you quote the bit that says you can use Perception on everything in a room in 1 minute? I mean, specifically. I ask this because I'm pretty sure the same rule you're going to quote applies equally well to finding everything in a dungeon. Or on a continent. I mean, yeah, there's a wall in the way, so the DC goes up by 10 but hey, that's easy to ace when you're taking 20 and have...

All of which essentially matches what nosig has been saying, ignoring the bit about finding everything in the dungeon from one spot.

Take 20 Perception check from the door finds you anything you can see with that Perception score from the door. And that will take as long as rolling 20 perception checks. 10 rounds (possibly 20) If you want to find something on the back side of a desk, you'll need to move in and do it again from elsewhere in the room. If you want to look in the desk drawers you'll need to do that. A through search of the room will take longer.

And there are no Spot or Search skills anymore. In 3.x Spot was used to find hiding creatures anyway, not traps or clues or anything else. It's not a spot or search difference. It's multiple uses of the Perception skill. It's standing there for a minute, scanning the room intensely, looking for anything odd or out of place.

Honestly, outside of PFS, I'd let you move around the room, take 2 minutes and Take 20 and find pretty much anything that wasn't inside or maybe under something else. And tell them how much longer it would take to do a thorough search. Largely because I'm not interested in either the group missing too much stuff or playing out the description of how they empty everything and break apart all the furniture, etc.

The Exchange

thejeff wrote:
Anguish wrote:

Mmmm.

Can you quote the bit that says you can use Perception on everything in a room in 1 minute? I mean, specifically. I ask this because I'm pretty sure the same rule you're going to quote applies equally well to finding everything in a dungeon. Or on a continent. I mean, yeah, there's a wall in the way, so the DC goes up by 10 but hey, that's easy to ace when you're taking 20 and have...

All of which essentially matches what nosig has been saying, ignoring the bit about finding everything in the dungeon from one spot.

Take 20 Perception check from the door finds you anything you can see with that Perception score from the door. And that will take as long as rolling 20 perception checks. 10 rounds (possibly 20) If you want to find something on the back side of a desk, you'll need to move in and do it again from elsewhere in the room. If you want to look in the desk drawers you'll need to do that. A through search of the room will take longer.

And there are no Spot or Search skills anymore. In 3.x Spot was used to find hiding creatures anyway, not traps or clues or anything else. It's not a spot or search difference. It's multiple uses of the Perception skill. It's standing there for a minute, scanning the room intensely, looking for anything odd or out of place.

Honestly, outside of PFS, I'd let you move around the room, take 2 minutes and Take 20 and find pretty much anything that wasn't inside or maybe under something else. And tell them how much longer it would take to do a thorough search. Largely because I'm not interested in either the group missing too much stuff or playing out the description of how they empty everything and break apart all the furniture, etc.

Thanks Jeff....

"by Jove, I think he's got it!"
;)


Search is one of those loose game concepts that really will depend on how each GM wants to play it. Per the rules, there is little defined other than simply taking a single move action to intentionally search.

Simply stating "I take 20 to search for traps" can be a perfectly valid option and potentially all one would need per RAW.

However, realistically, it would seem in-feasible to allow items hidden from general view to be found this way.

I would suggest that when confronted with a search check that does not simply involve looking around at visual stimulus to at least allow the person to search all squares within their reach. It seems a nice middle ground between the "it takes hours per room" and the "it takes a minute" crowd.

The Exchange

Dr Grecko wrote:

Search is one of those loose game concepts that really will depend on how each GM wants to play it. Per the rules, there is little defined other than simply taking a single move action to intentionally search.

Simply stating "I take 20 to search for traps" can be a perfectly valid option and potentially all one would need per RAW.

However, realistically, it would seem in-feasible to allow items hidden from general view to be found this way.

I would suggest that when confronted with a search check that does not simply involve looking around at visual stimulus to at least allow the person to search all squares within their reach. It seems a nice middle ground between the "it takes hours per room" and the "it takes a minute" crowd.

and clearly you missed my point.

Please excuse my de-composing your post above to highlight what I am trying to say in this thread...

"Search is one of those loose game concepts that really will depend on how each GM wants to play it."
Agreed. At this point I thought you understood what I was trying to say

"Per the rules, there is little defined other than simply taking a single move action to intentionally search."
ah.... a "search" doesn't take a single move action, as it is (in your words) "...one of those loose game concepts that really will depend on how each GM wants to play it...". Replace the word search with the works Perception Check in the line above and you have what the rules define. An active Perception Check is a move action...

"Simply stating "I take 20 to search for traps" can be a perfectly valid option and potentially all one would need per RAW."
There is no such thing as a "search for traps" skill to take 20 on. So it can't be a valid option, and is never defined in Rules As Written (not in PF anyway, in 3.5 it is, but ... we are talking about Pathfinder RAW right?)

"However, realistically, it would seem in-feasible to allow items hidden from general view to be found this way."
I do not understand what you are trying to say here. Please expand on this? are you saying that things ("items") hidden from general view could not be found with a Perception skill check?

"I would suggest that when confronted with a search check that does not simply involve looking around at visual stimulus to at least allow the person to search all squares within their reach."
Other than the issue with using the term "a search check" when you mean something like "a PC searching" ... this all seems to fall in the realm of YMMV, and needs to be worked out between the players and the GM. In PFS (where this thread started before it was moved to "general discussion") this becomes problematic as the mix of people changes from session to session. Thus, we get YMMV. Something I was trying to reduce by starting this thread....

"It seems a nice middle ground between the "it takes hours per room" and the "it takes a minute" crowd."
Or we can simply realize that "Perception is not Search" - the Perception skill is a skill defined in the rules (RAW) which takes a move action to perform, where as a Search is task of undefined nature and duration which must be defined by the judge & players each time it is performed.

The player (or players) says "I/We search the place" and the judge says how long that action (the search) takes. Saying something like "I take 20 on a search roll" is like saying "I take 20 on killing the monster" or "I take 20 on traveling to the market". If the player says "I take 20 on a Perception check" it is well defined and means that his PC makes 20 Perception skill checks from his current location, which takes a minute and nets a Perception skill check result of 20 plus the PCs Perception bonus (which may detect, or "perceive" things like those defined in the skill Perception).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think part of the frustration in this thread may stem from approaching the question from two different angles.
One is trying to figure out what happens when a player says, for example, "I search the room". How long does it take? How many rolls (or Take 10/20)? Do they have to specify anything more specific or will they find whatever can be found (possibly based on Perception)?

The other is nosig's frustration with not being allowed to make a Take 20 Perception check without being assumed to be searching the room.

It should be clear to everyone that the latter is possible. Though it's somewhat unclear what would be found.
Even in PFS though, the first is going to have a lot of table variation. It would be nice to have a more mechanical way to handle it. Which 3.x's Search skill did do, though there were other issues with that.

Example question: PFS scenario says something along the lines of: A PC who examines the floor near X with a DC Y Perception check notices Z.

Does the Take 20 Perception from the doorway have a chance of noticing, assuming that bit of floor is in line of sight?
Does "I search the room" have a chance of noticing?
Or do you have to specify that particular area or even the floor near X?

I can see an argument for any of the above.


nosig wrote:

and clearly you missed my point.

Please excuse my de-composing your post above to highlight what I am trying to say in this thread...

"Search is one of those loose game concepts that really will depend on how each GM wants to play it."
Agreed. At this point I thought you understood what I was trying to say

"Per the rules, there is little defined other than simply taking a single move action to intentionally search."
ah.... a "search" doesn't take a single move action, as it is (in your words) "...one of those loose game concepts that really will depend on how each GM wants to play it...". Replace the word search with the works Perception Check in the line above and you have what the rules define. An active Perception Check is a move action...

Forgive me for being blunt, but "searching" for something is defined in the skill itself.

Perception Skill wrote:
Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus. Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action.

If you are "searching" for traps, all it takes is a move action per raw. I'm saying that I agree with you that it's in-feasible when you can't actually see something, like an item in a drawer. For that, I suggested a nice compromise. But, I don't play PFS so what I suggest means nothing for those people. (I didn't realize this thread was moved)

Bottom line, "Perception" is indeed "Search". It says so in the skill.


thejeff wrote:
The other is nosig's frustration with not being allowed to make a Take 20 Perception check without being assumed to be searching the room.

Really, my side - not that I'm overtly disagreeing with anyone, actually - is the head-shaking side.

I still don't get the conversation. Where's the bit where nosig says to his DM "I just want to know what my PC can spot from the doorway. I don't expect him to see anything impossible, just spot stuff, like maybe there's a secret door behind a tapestry and by paying enough attention he might see the tapestry moving slightly due to air coming through the secret door's seams."

It's evident nosig has a huge beef with his DM, but said DM isn't (evidently) here to benefit from any of the discussion. I reiterate... communication is king, and this is an at-the-table learning how to make yourself understood discussion.

I don't deny him/her his/her right to make this thread... that's not where I'm going with this. Maybe it's just venting, but I still don't see the purpose that is being worked-towards here. The person who is supposed to have some sort of epiphany ("aha! nosig's PC just wants to know what they can SEE from the doorway!") isn't here.


Anguish wrote:
thejeff wrote:
The other is nosig's frustration with not being allowed to make a Take 20 Perception check without being assumed to be searching the room.

Really, my side - not that I'm overtly disagreeing with anyone, actually - is the head-shaking side.

I still don't get the conversation. Where's the bit where nosig says to his DM "I just want to know what my PC can spot from the doorway. I don't expect him to see anything impossible, just spot stuff, like maybe there's a secret door behind a tapestry and by paying enough attention he might see the tapestry moving slightly due to air coming through the secret door's seams."

It's evident nosig has a huge beef with his DM, but said DM isn't (evidently) here to benefit from any of the discussion. I reiterate... communication is king, and this is an at-the-table learning how to make yourself understood discussion.

I don't deny him/her his/her right to make this thread... that's not where I'm going with this. Maybe it's just venting, but I still don't see the purpose that is being worked-towards here. The person who is supposed to have some sort of epiphany ("aha! nosig's PC just wants to know what they can SEE from the doorway!") isn't here.

I shouldn't answer for nosig, but since this was in response to my post:

As I understand it, and feel free to call me out if I get this wrong, nosig is talking about playing in PFS, where this thread originated. Thus there is no single GM, but a common experience with multiple GMs.
In the hypothetical conversation upthread
Quote:

Player: But I only want to take 20 on -

Judge: exactly! weren't you listening to the distription of the room - there are bookshelves lining all the walls, and drawers you need to open -
Player: I only want to take a minute to look around -
Judge: What are you trying to pull? A minute to look and you see what I discribed, now if we can get back to the other players and get on with the game!
Player (well cowed now): sorry... it wont happen again.

Those "-"s at the end of the Player's lines? Those are where the Judge cut him off. That's where he was trying to explain before being shut down.

And probably rightly so. Or at least right for the player not to contest any further. Arguments about rules in the middle of a game are more disruptive than bad rulings. And in the PFS context, there often isn't time to hash things out after the game. Nor as much motivation as in a home game where you'll be dealing with the same GM for a longer period.

Liberty's Edge

Kazaan wrote:
To simplify things, say it takes 1 minute to scan a room from a single vantage point (take 20). If you're going to actually go through drawers and stuff, you'll probably need to figure how many "major features" there are to check (ie. how many cabinets, dressers, desks, rugs, etc). You can check one feature per round (move to search, move to walk to it). I'd say a Wisdom ability check would be in order for this because it isn't about "spotting" things, per say, but being intuitive and wise enough to know to check the desk, check the dresser, check this and that. You know the old adage, "Sure, he can see a fly on the back of a dog at 100 paces, but can he see why kids love Cinnamon Toast Crunch?" So we'll average and say that you divide the number of "searchable features" by 20 and, for every point you net on your Wisdom roll, you were "wise enough" to search that many major features. If there are only 2 features (ie. a Desk and a Rug), and you net a 8 on your Wis roll, you searched the desk but didn't think to look under the rug. 11 or higher means you knew to search both. If there are 20 features, a net result of 8 means you searched 8 of those 20, taking 8 turns (move + open). This will make otherwise non-obvious treasure into obvious treasure. It also determines how long you take. searching 8 things over 8 turns means about 48 seconds. So just shy of a minute to physically go and open the drawers and cabinets, but you didn't think to check under the bed, the rug, behind the painting, etc. If you got a 20, it means you knew to search all 20 features in the room which takes you 2 minutes. Moreover, since this is an Ability Check rather than a Skill Check, there is no fiddling with take 10 or take 20; you're either wise enough to check certain things or you're not.

If you open my drawer and search for something, let's say you want to get an idea of how much I did spend in Paizo products during the last year, you will have to spend way more than a movement action to do that.

Even 2 minutes won't be enough.

Next drawer: CDs, DVDs, some post package. Maybe 2 minutes will suffice if you are checking only the labels. Not if you want to check it for a false bottom, unless you want to dump all the content on the floor.

Unless the content is only some writing implements and nothing more, checking a drawer with a move action is totally unrealistic.
It would not be a perception check, it would be a luck check: "Out of X pieces of papers, what is the chance that what I want to find is the piece of paper on top?"


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think you guys are letting your perception of Perception get the better of you. It is the sum of what your character can notice, not necessarily see. Line of sight is for seeing things. You basically "SEE" everything within line of sight, baring stealth.

In one of the examples above, someone said that the PCs could not Perceive the trap door under the rug.

Just to be clear:

THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT PERCEPTION IS FOR!

Is there a bulge in the rug? Is there a difference in the dirt where the rug ends? Is the rug totally out of place and a sign that something is hidden there? Is the rug really a curtain that is missing from the window? Is there nothing on top of the rug making it easy to move, indicating access to a trap door?

THAT is what perception is for. The ability to quantify the logic that we use in relation to our senses is IMPOSSIBLE in real life with things like scientists and computers. Any of the "triggers" above could lead someone to the trap door. They are usually called hunches.

As DMs you don't describe every feature of the room. There are 100 plus items is the room I am in now. If it were a game, 4-5 of them matter. Perception allows the PCs to pick out the ones that matter without the DM giving a dissertation on each item in the room.

Perception is all the sensory information that the PCs have access to. ALL OF IT. Anything you describe as DM is just stuff that everyone automatically understands. Perception checks allow for the deviation of a character's ability to understand what is right in front of them.

Please get over the "there is no search check."

Of course there is. It is done using the Perception skill. There is no Jump skill, there is a Jump check. There is no Tumble skill, there is a Tumble check. There is no Decipher Text skill, there is a decipher text check. There is no Pick Lock skill, there is a pick lock check.

It is OK to call the check what the check is as long as the right skill is used. Often times it only makes sense to separate them. You gain a +4 to JUMP CHECKS if your speed is 40. You don't gain a +4 to ACROBATICS CHECKS or the ACROBATIC SKILL for having a speed of 40. Only to the Jump portion of it.

The only time a Perception Check would ONLY mean from the square you are standing in is during combat rounds (not necessarily combat). Otherwise, movement is not tracked and your actions don't have to be so detailed.


Komoda wrote:

I think you guys are letting your perception of Perception get the better of you. It is the sum of what your character can notice, not necessarily see. Line of sight is for seeing things. You basically "SEE" everything within line of sight, baring stealth.

In one of the examples above, someone said that the PCs could not Perceive the trap door under the rug.

Just to be clear:

THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT PERCEPTION IS FOR!

Is there a bulge in the rug? Is there a difference in the dirt where the rug ends? Is the rug totally out of place and a sign that something is hidden there? Is the rug really a curtain that is missing from the window? Is there nothing on top of the rug making it easy to move, indicating access to a trap door?

THAT is what perception is for. The ability to quantify the logic that we use in relation to our senses is IMPOSSIBLE in real life with things like scientists and computers. Any of the "triggers" above could lead someone to the trap door. They are usually called hunches.

As DMs you don't describe every feature of the room. There are 100 plus items is the room I am in now. If it were a game, 4-5 of them matter. Perception allows the PCs to pick out the ones that matter without the DM giving a dissertation on each item in the room.

Perception is all the sensory information that the PCs have access to. ALL OF IT. Anything you describe as DM is just stuff that everyone automatically understands. Perception checks allow for the deviation of a character's ability to understand what is right in front of them.

Please get over the "there is no search check."

Of course there is. It is done using the Perception skill. There is no Jump skill, there is a Jump check. There is no Tumble skill, there is a Tumble check. There is no Decipher Text skill, there is a decipher text check. There is no Pick Lock skill, there is a pick lock check.

It is OK to call the check what the check is as long as the right skill is used. Often times...

While I largely agree, especially with things like the rug example, we're back to the timing question: If we call searching the room a Perception check and allow that to cover finding things under or within other things, how long does it take?

Can I roll a single Perception check as a move action and have a chance of finding anything and everything in the room? Can I Take 20 and be sure of finding anything it's possible for me to find in a most 2 minutes?

Verdant Wheel

How about the creation of a new type of terrain ? Difficult terrain take more effort to move through it. A cluttered terrain takes more effort to search through it. If you are standing in a empty dungeon square is a move action to search. If you are standing in the middle of a tropical jungle or a junkyard, it take 10 times longer to make a search check.


Yes, let's complicate things even more.


thejeff wrote:
As I understand it, and feel free to call me out if I get this wrong, nosig is talking about playing in PFS, where this thread originated. Thus there is no single GM, but a common experience with multiple GMs.

Ahhhhhhh. Enlightenment. Thank you.

See, at my tables, with the two groups I run (not PFS), I'd never be a dink and not let my players explain what they want to do.

I do get your comments about disrupting the flow of a game, especially in organized play, but with me having missed the context that this was PFS, I was getting this weird vibe from the thread.

Thanks!


Komoda wrote:

I think you guys are letting your perception of Perception get the better of you. It is the sum of what your character can notice, not necessarily see. Line of sight is for seeing things. You basically "SEE" everything within line of sight, baring stealth.

In one of the examples above, someone said that the PCs could not Perceive the trap door under the rug.

Just to be clear:

THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT PERCEPTION IS FOR!

Just to be clearer than clear, here's my sentence you seem to be referring to:

"But if there's a trap-door under the rug under the desk, there isn't line-of-sight so you can't see it."

My hypothetical trap door that is hidden by a rug is itself obscured by a solid object (in this case a desk), and I specifically went out of my way to point out that there wasn't line-of-sight to the doorway.

Bold. Bigger. Yell, yell. But y'know, this isn't an argument. It's just us, agreeing with one another, louder and louder. <Grin>


Anguish wrote:
Komoda wrote:

I think you guys are letting your perception of Perception get the better of you. It is the sum of what your character can notice, not necessarily see. Line of sight is for seeing things. You basically "SEE" everything within line of sight, baring stealth.

In one of the examples above, someone said that the PCs could not Perceive the trap door under the rug.

Just to be clear:

THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT PERCEPTION IS FOR!

Just to be clearer than clear, here's my sentence you seem to be referring to:

"But if there's a trap-door under the rug under the desk, there isn't line-of-sight so you can't see it."

My hypothetical trap door that is hidden by a rug is itself obscured by a solid object (in this case a desk), and I specifically went out of my way to point out that there wasn't line-of-sight to the doorway.

So just to be clear, how do the characters find this? What actions need to be taken to find the trapdoor under the rug under the desk?

You've said a check from the doorway wouldn't work. No line of sight to the trapdoor.
Or to the rug? I'd assume the rug would be at least partly visible sticking out from under the desk.

Since it's concealed by the desk and the rug, I'd assume regular Perception checks from anywhere else in the room also couldn't find it.
How about if I just said "I search the room."? You determine how long that takes. Is that enough?

What if I search the desk? Or is that assumed to be just going through the drawers and the like?

If I actually say "I move the desk", is that enough or is the trap door still out of line of sight under the rug and thus can't be found.

I assume at the very worst I get a Perception check after moving the rug?

And just to jump back to the start, this situation is the very kind of thing that happens regularly in the genre literature. Our keen-eyed hero sees the disturbance in the dust where the rug has been moved or the faint scratches in the floor from the desk moving and realizes that there's something hidden underneath.


Exactly. There could be a draft coming from the trap door. Did you do a convection study to make sure the difference in ambient temperatures don't cause a draft? The last person that put the desk in place scratched the floor, didn't you see that? The guy that rolled a 20 on perception did!

I can't see the plane flying overhead right now, but not only can I tell you something is there, I can tell you it has jet engines.

Anyone that has lived in houses can often tell where a bathroom is in a house they have never been in. Extra spaces in walls are much the same (barring magical dimensions, of course).

Point is, that is still exactly what perception is for.

The issue of time just has to be worked out at the table. "A room" could be 20 x 20 with one chair. Wouldn't take long to search that. "A room" could be like Smaug's treasure hoard and take months to search.


thejeff wrote:

So just to be clear, how do the characters find this? What actions need to be taken to find the trapdoor under the rug under the desk?

You've said a check from the doorway wouldn't work. No line of sight to the trapdoor.
Or to the rug? I'd assume the rug would be at least partly visible sticking out from under the desk.

It depends. Remember that the environment is "in the DM's head". We do our best to describe the environment, to create pictures with words, but like a dream you only "see" what is focal. There is no context in a dream, only what you're dreaming about.

My point is that until this question is asked - by you or by a player - the answer may not actually have been defined.

In this particular instance, here, now, in this thread, the room that I imagined when I wrote my sentence the rug was a small thing, meant for the comfort of the person who sat at the desk. They'd often take their footwear off while they scribed. The rug is thicker than most, with a hearty padding layer underneath its fluffy woolen surface, the better to provide comfortable rest for its owners heels, while insulating them from the otherwise cold stone floor. It is without art however, and about two feet by two feet.

It is plainly visible from behind the desk if one but moves the heavy chair back.

Quote:

Since it's concealed by the desk and the rug, I'd assume regular Perception checks from anywhere else in the room also couldn't find it.

How about if I just said "I search the room."? You determine how long that takes. Is that enough?

Well, as it happens with this rug, were you to simply stand behind the desk, its thickness really doesn't leave any hints that there is a trapdoor beneath it. The very slight imperfections in the floor where its seams exist are insufficient to ripple the rug's surface. So you're going to have to specifically be trying to find something that is simply not visible.

That isn't the case with all rugs, trap doors, desks, or rooms. It just happens to be the case with this one. Were its owner less inclined to keep his (cramped) feet warm, he might have used a thinner rug, which might make the task much easier.

So, if a PC were to wander through this room and take say... two minutes, there's a very decent chance that the innocuous rug in a fairly obvious place - it does look rather comfy, doesn't it? - might not draw a lot of attention.

If on the other hand a PC were in this room because they'd heard that its owner had concealed a small stash of incriminating documents somewhere within its confines, the rug might look somewhat less innocent.

Context matters. Were I running this adventure, I would take the players' actions into consideration. I would incorporate a circumstance bonus to locate the hidden trapdoor if the players stated they were actively trying to locate hidden things. Were they just taking a casual perusal - say for instance they somehow got confused and thought this wasn't the office they had been told about - they wouldn't get the bonus. I'd assign a DC, because that's the way it's done. Finally, I'd have to take the room's size and relative clutter into consideration and literally invent a reasonable period of time required to "search" it. Search with a small "s", just to be clear.

Again, this isn't a PFS game... I don't run those, or play in them. This is just friendly talk about how Perception can be used.

To finally answer the question, in this case I'd probably figure less than five minutes of taking 20 will either find this trapdoor or not, depending on if the DC is met.

That there's also a second cache of documents, stone shaped under the floor somewhere else in the room, that the PCs haven't heard about, well... that's only going to get located if you're not satisfied with the first cache and decide to take... I dunno, probably about twenty minutes or so for a room this size, and with enough interesting nooks and crannies where stuff could plausibly be hidden.

Quote:
What if I search the desk? Or is that assumed to be just going through the drawers and the like?

In this case, were one of my players to say they were searching the desk, I'd probably take into consideration that they're going to be crawling under it to look at its underside. Kneeling on the rug may believably reveal that the floor gives slightly, and/or sounds hollow. Again, a circumstance bonus to the DC. But if you decide to look specifically for hidden things "at the desk" or "around the desk" or "on the desk" (I don't play word-games with my players), I'd allow both a roll and a take 20. A single one. (We often do this, for speed. Maybe a roll is enough to notice things, in which case the task is completed in less than a round. Maybe the roll is poor and nothing is found. Then the player can declare they want to be thorough about it... the very definition of take-20.) By single one, I mean no more than a single take-20 attempt. So I believe that's been established as a minute.

Quote:
If I actually say "I move the desk", is that enough or is the trap door still out of line of sight under the rug and thus can't be found.

Well, I gave more description above - because like a player would you asked for it - so in this case line-of-sight to the rug alone isn't going to cut it. But much like crawling under the desk, there's a pretty good chance you're going to disturb the rug dragging the desk out of the way. Again, big circumstance bonus to a passive (automatic) Perception check. Might just make it with a straight take-10.

Quote:
I assume at the very worst I get a Perception check after moving the rug?

You get a Perception check any time you ask for one. You don't necessarily need one though. At least in my mind, PCs can see their eyelids without any special effort. Removing the rug (even accidentally) exposes the trap door, at which point it is very much out-in-the-open, much like the desk itself was. No Perception roll was required to see the desk.

Oh, and interestingly enough... you as a player might consider "um, is the document we're looking for one of these?" to be a valid question to ask right at this moment in-game. Well... you did make rather a mess of sneaking into this place and you do suspect the guards are looking through the villa for the suspected intruders. So. There's maybe fifty different ledgers here, each with a bunch of names and numbers. It might take anywhere from one to say... six minutes to review all of those to see if the one you're looking for is there. Tell you what... if you want to do this, you roll a d6. I'll roll a d10, because the guards are sure as heck going to get to this room sometime in the next ten minutes. If your number is less than my number, you get your answer before they arrive, yes or no. If your number is higher... you took too long and they show up while you're looking things over. Up to you. Wanna stick around and make sure you found what you're looking for and risk getting seen - or worse, in a fight - or do you want to risk having to sneak in again another night, with the owner of the place alerted. Hmmm.

Note: this is the kind of moment that's awesome for PCs to shine in. This is where they do crazy stuff like rope trick in a corner, review the paperwork, wait for the guards to check the room, then come back down and sneak out once the way is clear.

Quote:
And just to jump back to the start, this situation is the very kind of thing that happens regularly in the genre literature. Our keen-eyed hero sees the disturbance in the dust where the rug has been moved or the faint scratches in the floor from the desk moving and realizes that there's something hidden underneath.

Sure. And sometimes that works. But to be fair, in literature there's no chance of failure, because the reader isn't interested in reading stories about Indiana Jones plundering cave after cave and not finding anything.

What's interesting in a book isn't necessarily interesting in an interactive roleplay scenario. Not every hidden treasure needs to be - or should be - a gimme. Nothing should be impossible for the PCs to find, just as no monster (super-duper generalization here!) should be impossible for PCs to beat in a fight. But it's not a given.

Some times are simply challenges. And if take-20 means "find every hidden thing, ever", that's no challenge. Sometimes you should need to acquire those pesky circumstance bonuses to push your skills over the edge.

I love it when my players plan and scheme. When they start gathering together bits of debris and start trying to reinforce a rickety bridge. When they find out the guard captain's wife's name so they can name-drop when they try to Bluff him about something. When they get one PC to distract an NPC while the other Stealths around in back.

One last time, none of this is PFS. This is all home games running either homebrew stories or written materials from APs to modules to Slumbering Tsar.

I try very hard to make the world interesting and above all fun for my players. I listen to what they say, and how they say it, and I can say with confidence that nobody at my tables are unhappy with how I adjudicate Perception in general.

Holy crap this ended up big. Sorry. Got carried away doing the DM-voice thing and describing some stuff. Again, sorry.


I like to reward players who have very high perception.

I would let them find a trap door under a rug, under a desk, in a dark room, down a hallway, around a corner and through a stone wall 5 feet thick.

Each factor adds to the DC but if they PC some how had +105 to his perception he might be able to pull it off.

I would let 1 min a the door have at least an chance to find everything but many things will be so hard to find as to be practically impossible.

Once a skill is goes beyond +20 you are into the land of superpower and this should be taken into account. Maybe you can map the dungeon with a whistle and some echos.

I would love some support on what you can do with -20 penalty or -50 or even a -100 penalty.


Mathius wrote:

I like to reward players who have very high perception.

I would let them find a trap door under a rug, under a desk, in a dark room, down a hallway, around a corner and through a stone wall 5 feet thick.

Each factor adds to the DC but if they PC some how had +105 to his perception he might be able to pull it off.

I would let 1 min a the door have at least an chance to find everything but many things will be so hard to find as to be practically impossible.

Once a skill is goes beyond +20 you are into the land of superpower and this should be taken into account. Maybe you can map the dungeon with a whistle and some echos.

I would love some support on what you can do with -20 penalty or -50 or even a -100 penalty.

I admit that I'm uncomfortable with players who try to make auto-win builds. If the game isn't challenging, why are we bothering with dice and chances to fail? Players who pump their to-hit astronomically high encourage me to find ways to raise the AC of enemies so every combat isn't an auto-win. Players who pump their AC so their are unhittable encourage me to find (some) enemies who target touch AC or saves.

I don't believe in negating my players abilities... nothing so drastic. But when a player gleefully produces a build that can save-or-die almost every monster, I generally want to make sure there's a mixture of creatures who are immune.

It's a touchy subject, but I'm open about it and we discuss "munchkin" builds. There is very little PC death at my table and I am not a harsh DM but I discourage auto-wins for things that involve risk.


So, to get back to a question posed re: my earlier example, once I describe what the situation is I might suggest something like "you've got a bad feeling about this spot" or "Looks like something terrible happened here." In the case of the elusive trap-door-under-a-rug-under-a-desk I might say that if they spotted SOME kind of sign of a trap door that it looks like something is concealed there.

The bigger questions are how long does it take and what does that search action look like. For my home game I do a lot of handwaving; if the party isn't under duress it takes about a minute (eating into buff times and such) and it basically entails covering all areas of the room that might be seen or experienced from whatever the player is describing. In the case of standing in the doorway looking I'd figure what the PCs can experience from the doorway.

In the cases where the PCs are threatened (the fighter is holding a half-dozen mites at the bottom of a stairwell while the rogue and cleric search for a concealed portcullis control panel) the search area and action is very specific: limited to whatever is within about 15' (10' for slow-movers) and covered with the basic senses.

TL/DR. Bottom line: don't let the search get in the way of the fun. Then again I've never GM'd PFS games, so I don't know what the restrictions are there.

51 to 79 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Perception is not Search. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion